|
This information comes directly from the Washtenaw County website which is
"public domain." Except for formatting, no changes have been made to this
material. It is included herein with the specific knowledge of the County
webmaster. Further, as a Washtenaw County Circuit Court writing, this is neither
binding precedent nor governing dictate even on other judges in this specific
county.
Footnote 1: Written by The Honorable Judge John N. Kirkendall, Family Division, Washtenaw
County Trial Court, Ann Arbor, Michigan. The author gratefully acknowledges
contributions from the following lawyers and judges: Craig S. Ross, Esq.,
Washtenaw County Friend of the Court's Office; Norman N. Robbins, Esq., domestic
relations practitioner, author and lecturer; Hon. Bruce A. Newman, Genesee
County Probate Judge; Hon. Joan E. Young, Oakland County Circuit Judge; and
Monika H. Sacks, domestic relations practitioner, author and lecturer. They have
reviewed the chart and suggested additions and improvements. I thank Stuart D.
Lurie, law clerk, who has helped revise the chart since its first publication.
Errors are mine. The chart should be viewed as "evolving", not "finished."
Therefore, the reader's suggestions and comments will be helpful.
Footnote 8: Harper v Harper,
199 Mich. App. 409 (1993). Income, employment history, certainty of future
income and financial position are factors to be weighed. Mazurkiewicz v Mazurkiewicz, 164 Mich. App. 492 (1987) weighed husband's income in his
favor over objection of wife that because she was a homemaker she could never
prevail on this factor. Court agreed but stated the trial court did not unduly
stress this factor. In Dempsey v Dempsey, 409 Mich. 495 (1980),
the Supreme Court agreed that the trial court placed undue emphasis on economic
factors in awarding custody. The cases are strongly suggestive that while this
factor must be weighed, the court must use care in not placing a good deal of
reliance upon economic factors in making a custody decision. Bowers v
Bowers, 198 Mich. App. 320 (1993) states that eligibility for health
insurance, taking managerial classes, and informing other party of insurance
benefits for children are all relevant facts to consider. (The court here also
referred to a tug of war by the parties over child's clothing.)
|
.jpg)