Zainab Hans v. Ahsan Hans, 355468

Background

Parties arbitrated divorce issues; trial court entered a consent judgment in March 2019 incorporating the arbitrator’s award.
Major assets: two residences (Linden Way and Berkshire) and substantial unsecured marital debt, including large attorney fee liens recorded against the properties.
Arbitration allocated debts (defendant to pay 75%, plaintiff 25%) and directed each party to pay their own fees except defendant to pay $50,000 of plaintiff’s attorney fees; judgment referenced attorney liens but did not fix final lien amounts.
Sales of the properties produced insufficient net proceeds to cover the competing attorney liens and the allocated marital debt.
Defendant moved for clarification of the judgment’s instruction on distributing sale proceeds; the trial court ruled that attorney liens—including the $50,000 defendant owed to plaintiff’s counsel—had equal priority and must be paid first, leaving no funds for an equal split.
Plaintiff moved for reconsideration arguing this interpretation conflicted with the judgment’s directive to evenly split proceeds; the trial court denied relief and plaintiff appealed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Proper interpretation of the consent judgment on distribution of sale proceeds and priority of attorney liens	Judgment required proceeds be split equally between parties before applying liens; $50,000 lien should not get priority	Judgment and arbitrator’s award required attorney liens be paid first, then debts, and only leftover (if any) be equally divided	Court held judgment required liens be paid first; trial court’s interpretation enforced
Authority to alter or clarify the consent judgment post-judgment	Trial court lacked authority to modify consent judgment absent consent; defendant’s motion was untimely under arbitration rules	Trial court may clarify or fill voids in an incomplete consent judgment and had authority after judgment entry	Court held trial court properly clarified an incomplete term (amounts/priority of liens) and did not impermissibly modify the consent judgment
Whether trial court had to follow arbitrator’s supplemental recommendation after judgment	Court should adopt arbitrator’s supplemental recommendation to split proceeds 50/50 and then pay liens	Arbitrator’s supplemental recommendation conflicted with the judgment and was beyond arbitrator’s post-award authority	Court refused to adopt the arbitrator’s belated recommendation; arbitrator lacked authority after statutory correction window closed
Preservation, equitable-distribution and due-process claims	Denied reconsideration and allocation produced inequitable distribution; delay in ruling denied due process	Claims unpreserved; court’s role was interpretation, not redistribution; delay was not prejudicial and plaintiff had opportunity to be heard	Court found issues largely unpreserved and reviewed for plain error; no plain error or prejudice demonstrated; equitable redistribution not permitted by court's limited role

Key Cases Cited

Andrusz v. Andrusz, 320 Mich App 445 (2017) (consent divorce judgment construed as contract; court may fill voids)
Blaske v. Blaske, 33 Mich App 210 (1971) (consent judgment generally not modifiable without consent absent fraud, mistake, illegality, or unconscionability)
Greaves v. Greaves, 148 Mich App 643 (1986) (trial court may fill voids in incomplete consent judgments and balance equities)
In re Lobaina Estate, 267 Mich App 415 (2005) (ordinary contract interpretation principles apply to consent judgments)
Demski v. Petlick, 309 Mich App 404 (2015) (plain-error review for unpreserved issues)
Gordon Sel-Way, Inc. v. Spence Bros., Inc., 438 Mich 488 (1991) (distinguishing arbitrator’s and trial court’s authority post-judgment)
Berger v. Berger, 277 Mich App 700 (2008) (equitable-distribution principle in divorce matters)
Al-Maliki v. LaGrant, 286 Mich App 483 (2009) (due process requires notice and meaningful opportunity to be heard)