734-359-7018
Now Accepting New Clients!
Blog

DIVORCE 15: Recovery of attorney fees on the basis of misconduct.

In this case, plaintiff and defendant, both attorneys, were married in 1973. The marriage produced two children who were adults at the time of the divorce. In the early 2000s, plaintiff lost approximately $1 million in investments when the stock market crashed. The parties agreed at trial that the initial collapse of their marriage coincided with the loss. However, they also provided extensive testimony regarding their respective perspectives on the subsequent breakdown of their relationship, including the fact that the couple stopped sharing a marital relationship at least 10 years prior to trial. At some point, plaintiff began engaging in a long-term affair with Person J, whom he secretly supported financially for several years prior to the divorce.

The trial court ultimately ordered plaintiff to pay defendant $68,452.60 in attorney fees.  Plaintiff argues that the trial court erred by entering an order for attorney fees related to his misconduct concerning his support of Person J.

It is well-settled that attorney fees are generally not recoverable as of right in divorce cases—fees may only be awarded when authorized by statute, court rule, contract, or common-law exception.  At issue in this case is the common-law exception permitting recovery of attorney fees on the basis of misconduct. Under this exception, an award of legal fees is authorized where the party requesting payment of the fees has been forced to incur them as a result of the other party’s unreasonable conduct in the course of the litigation.

To award fees on the basis of misconduct, the trial court must determine that misconduct, in fact, occurred and that the misconduct caused the party seeking fees to incur the fees awarded. The party requesting fees bears the burden of proving that the fees were incurred and that the fees requested are reasonable. A party may not merely present a billing statement for approval under this exception; rather, he or she must demonstrate by documentation and testimony what charges can be attributed to the other party’s misconduct.

The trial court found that certain charges submitted by defendant were supported by testimony and other record evidence.  By way of example, the trial court awarded attorney fees incurred with respect to defendant’s motion for substitute service of a subpoena directing Person J to appear for a deposition. Billing entries explicitly referred to the motion by name. In addition, it was testified that the motion was necessary because Person J was avoiding service, and her testimony was required to demonstrate the falsity of plaintiff’s assertion concerning the extent of his support.  The trial court did evaluate each entry individually, accepting some, rejecting others, and reducing the amount for some charges to reflect that not all of the time spent was occasioned by plaintiff’s misconduct.  The trial court found that the services reflected in the billing entries it approved were incurred as a result of plaintiff’s misconduct during discovery.

At the Plymouth law firm of Aldrich Legal Services, our attorneys have the skill and experience you need to address all family law issues that may arise during your divorce, including:

  • Property division
  • Spousal support
  • Division of property

We are committed to providing each of our clients with quality legal representation and superior service. To schedule a free consultation with an experienced divorce lawyer at our firm, contact our Michigan law office.

Contact Aldrich Legal Services

Do I Have To Go To Court If I Get A Divorce?

If you’re contemplating a divorce in Michigan, you probably have a lot of questions. One of the most intimidating aspects of getting a divorce in Michigan or anywhere else is the idea of having to appear in court. The laws for getting a...

Do I Need A Prenuptial Agreement?

A prenuptial agreement is not only for the wealthy people in society, like Hollywood celebrities and the like but also for any couple that brings personal assets, property, debts or children from a former relationship into the marriage. This...

PROBATE 19: Respondent argues she did not receive notice of hearing until five days before.

Respondent argues that she was denied her right to due process of law because she did not receive notice of the hearing until five days before it took place. Respondent argues that the five-day notice of hearing violated her right to due process. Due process generally requires that notice be reasonably calculated to apprise interested parties of the action and to provide them an opportunity to be heard.

WILLS/TRUSTS 11: Allegations that a trustee violated his fiduciary duties.

MCL 700.7803 states that a trustee shall act as would a prudent person in dealing with the property of another, including following the standards of the Michigan prudent investor rule. If the trustee has special skills or is named trustee on the basis of representation of special skills or expertise, the trustee is under a duty to use those skills. MCL 700.7810 states that a trustee shall take reasonable steps to take control of and protect the trust property.

How Is Probation Violated?

If you are on probation, it means you have the judge's trust and have been allowed some level of freedom. Now you must work on ensuring you don’t violate your probation. You will need to abide by every term that the criminal court judge...

REAL ESTATE 25: Foreclosure and sheriff’s sale, redemption period expired.

In lieu of an answer, defendants filed a motion for summary disposition under MCR 2.116(C)(8) and (C)(10), arguing essentially that plaintiff lacked standing to bring claims related to the Property because plaintiff’s legal interest in the Property was extinguished through properly conducted foreclosure proceedings and the redemption period had expired and that none of plaintiff’s claims had legal merit.

I Was Arrested- Can I Question The Cop?

There are things that the police wouldn’t want people to know, and this is for the apparent reason that their investigations wouldn’t yield many convictions as they would like. The role of a police officer is to make arrests followed by...

REAL ESTATE 24: Court dismissed defendant’s counterclaim for failure to join third party.

Defendants’ counter-complaint sought a declaration, among other things, that defendants had acquired a legal right to use the Drive as a means to access their property. But defendants did not add the LLC, the owner of the Drive, as a party to their suit. Consequently, the trial court dismissed defendant’s counterclaim for easement rights because of the failure to join LLC—a necessary party.

Can Your Marriage Be Annulled?

An annulment officially erases a marriage. In Michigan, it is harder to get your marriage annulled than it is to get a divorce. The annulment procedure is very similar to the divorce process, and you need filing of the right documents and service...

Estate Planning- What Errors You Should Avoid?

Estate planning is a task financial experts say you should never neglect. Despite this, according to a 2017 survey, 6 in 10 Americans don't have a will. While not doing any estate planning is the biggest mistake of all, here are three...

REAL ESTATE 22: Court found denial of rezoning from multiple-family to commercial invalid.

Plaintiff brought suit, alleging that the rezoning denial deprived it of its constitutional rights to equal protection and substantive due process. The parties filed competing motions for summary disposition. The briefs largely focused on whether defendant had treated the Property differently from other properties in the downtown area and whether it had legitimate reasons for doing so.

FAMILY LAW 24: Plaintiff-mother denied her motion to change parenting time.

The Child Custody Act of 1970, MCL 722.21 authorizes a trial court to issue custody and parenting-time orders that are in the child’s best interests. A showing of proper cause or change of circumstances is required to modify a parenting-time order. The movant has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that either proper cause or a change of circumstances exists.

Custody of Pets In A Divorce

Divorce comes with confusion and mixed emotions. The question of who gets custody of pets may be even more confusing- especially since pets can begin to feel like family. Courts often look out for the interest of human children and allow for shared...

PROBATE 14: Trial court found involuntary mental health treatment appropriate.

To receive involuntary mental health treatment under the Mental Health Code, MCL 330.1001, a petitioner is required to establish that respondent has a mental illness and who as a result of that mental illness can reasonably be expected within the near future to intentionally or unintentionally seriously physically injure himself, herself, or another individual, and who has engaged in an act or acts or made significant threats that are substantially supportive of the expectation.

BUSINESS LAW 6: Membership dispute in a LLC.

Based on the testimony, the trial court ordered the dissolution and liquidation of the assets of the LLC. The trial court also directed the LLC to make a distribution to plaintiff, which represented the 49% share owed to him to compensate for defendant’s distribution.

WILLS/TRUSTS 8: What makes a will irrevocable?

The parties agreed that the decedent properly executed the 2005 will with his wife, but the probate court was asked to rule on whether the terms of that will made it irrevocable, which would mean that the decedent could not change his estate plan by way of the 2015 will.

Windows Tint Laws- Is Window Tinting Legal?

Some of the reasons why people tint their car windows include to enhance safety, achieve a good level of privacy and to prevent their skin from the damaging effects of UV rays. Despite these benefits, window tinting can affect a driver’s...

DIVORCE 10: For an agreement to be unconscionable, there must be both procedural unconscionability and substantive unconscionability.

Despite having signed the proposed divorce judgment, defendant filed an answer to the divorce complaint on February 28, 2017, and on March 2, 2017, she filed a response to plaintiff’s motion for entry of proofs and judgment, along with a motion to restore her possession of the marital home. Defendant claimed arguments premised on unconscionability.

Don't let a bad decision, unfair contract, or a messy divorce get in the way of a promising future!
Contact the experienced team at Aldrich Legal Services today to schedule your free initial
consultation
and secure reliable and trustworthy representation today!
Get the Help You Need From a Team You Can Truly Count On: (734) 404-3000
734-237-6482
734-366-4405