The Michigan Court of Appeals released an opinion on October 16, 2012 discussing how a trial court should interpret a provision in the parties' judgment of divorce that the alimony obligation is terminated upon "cohabitation [of the obligee] with an unrelated male." The court had previously ruled on a similar case [Smith v Smith, 278 Mich App 198; 748 NW2d 258 (2008)], finding the term “cohabitation” to be “unclear” or “equally susceptible to more than one meaning.”
The Smith panel established a "totality-of-the-circumstances test" trial courts should consider when determining whether "cohabitation" exists that justifies termination of an alimony obligation. Specifically, the Smith panel gave examples of three types of evidence trial courts should consider when determining whether a person is "cohabiting" with another within the meaning of the alimony provisions in the judgment. According to Smith, the trial court should examine the following issues:
The nature of the couple’s living arrangements and the extent to which they share a common residence.
The American Bar Association has published a new resource that will be helpful for those lawyers practicing in locales with clients whose marriages have been contracted according to Shariah law. The book is titled Practicing Law in Shariah Courts: Seven Strategies for Achieving Justice in Shariah Courts. It describes the Shariah courts of Northern Nigeria, and offers advice for counsel practicing in Shariah courts worldwide, particularly in cases involving women. The author, Hauwa Ibrahim, is entering her fifth year at Harvard University. Prior to joining Harvard Divinity School Ibrahim was a Radcliffe Fellow and was a jointly appointed Fellow to the Human Rights Program and the Islamic Legal Studies Program.
Ibrahim provides valuable insight into practicing law in Shariah courts, and answers some questions that arise from being on the field, and also from her experience of seeking justice under these laws both legally and spiritually. Ibrahim discusses the delicate and flexible boundary between the rule of law and individual interpretations of Shariah Law that may unjustifiably cause individual and social ills.
Teachers tell me that Fridays and Mondays are often tough days for kids. Why? Many children have to transition from one parent to the other on Friday. The weekends may be stressful because of differences between the parenting styles of each parent regarding such things as scheduling, discipline, meals, bedtimes. Children may come back to school on Monday tired, cranky, stressed. The reasons could be one or more of the above--or something else altogether. Research shows that only 64% of children live in households where there are two parents.Trends are changing and the makeup of a family unit is not always the Ozzie & Harriet style family.
Download PEW-social-trends-2010-families
Divorce usually has a negative financial effect on families. A huge percentage of single mothers and their children live below the poverty level. There are so many social factors in addition to poverty, however, that affect whether children succeed in life or fail. A parent must be truly committed to raising healthy kids to do the job right.
Paul Tough’s important new book, “How Children Succeed,” recently reviewed on this Blog, is discussed by Nicholas D. Kristof in "Cuddle Your Kid!," as seen in last Saturday's New York Times. Kristof writes:
Timothy Williams, writing on October 18, 2012 in the New York Times, details the ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit sitting in Manhattan, that DOMA, the federal statute defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman, unlawfully discriminates against same-sex married couples by denying them equal federal benefits.
The Second Circuit Court is the second federal appeals court to reject a central portion of the federal law, the Defense of Marriage Act. Last May, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, in Boston, also held DOMA unconstitutional.
Both court rule and statute in Michigan allow parties to recover attorney fees for domestic relations cases. Sometimes, those fees and costs are awarded as sanctions under MCR 2.114 or MCR 2.625.
However, the trial court needs to have specific information and evidence before it in order to fashion an appropriate award. Although an evidentiary hearing may be requested, it is not necessary if a court makes the award and in its order allows the party against whom fees and costs are assessed to request an evidentiary hearing to challenge that award. Normally, the judge will make it clear that a challenge may subject the objector to further fees and costs to defend.
Several documents should be submitted by the attorney seeking such an award. Recommended support for such a motion are the following:
