The Michigan court of appeals ruled in Birry v Birry, Docket No. 256627 (Aug 24, 2006) on a number of issues that are of interest to family practitioners:
1). Discharge in bankruptcy: The trial court ruled that all amounts owed to Plaintiff Wife were non-dischargeable in bankruptcy. The trial court also held that all sums owed to the wife were in the nature of support.
The analysis of the COA was two-fold. It vacated the T/C's ruling that all amounts were non-dischargeable, stating that it was only within the authority of a bankruptcy court to make that determination in the event that a bankruptcy action was filed. On the other hand, the COA held that it was within the T/C's authority to decide that all sums owed with in the nature of support, citing Krist v Krist, 246 Mich App 59 (2001).
2). Imputation of income for child support purposes: The COA upheld the T/C's refusal to impute income to the wife and also upheld imputation of income to the husband, citing reliance upon not only his W-2s, but also his own representations on loan origination documents.