Now Accepting New Clients!


Plaintiff appeals as of right the trial court’s divorce judgment, challenging the decision to award each party their respective 401(k) accounts. Plaintiff argued in the trial court that she was entitled to a portion of the appreciation that accrued to defendant’s 401(k) during the marriage as a marital asset under MCL 552.18(1). To the contrary, defendant argued that plaintiff was not entitled to any of his 401(k) because both parties contributed the same amount of money to their respective 401(k) plans during the marriage and defendant’s 401(k) account only grew more because he started out with more—which was his premarital, separate property. The trial court agreed with defendant, holding that plaintiff was not entitled to any portion of defendant’s 401(k). Plaintiff appeals.


 In a divorce action, this Court reviews for clear error a trial court’s factual findings on the division of marital property and whether a particular asset qualifies as marital or separate property. Findings of fact are clearly erroneous when this Court is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. We consider whether a trial court’s dispositional rulings are fair and equitable in light of its findings of fact and will reverse only if convinced that the disposition is inequitable.


The goal in distributing marital assets in a divorce proceeding is to reach an equitable distribution of property in light of all the circumstances. Typically, each party will be awarded their own separate property without division with the other party. There is no dispute in this case that the amount of defendant’s 401(k) account that accrued up until the parties were married was defendant’s separate property and not subject to division as marital property. The growth of Defendant’s 401(k) was achieved with contributions from marital property.  However, we conclude that, under the circumstances of this case, the trial court’s decision to award each party their own appreciated 401(k) plan was fair and equitable. As the trial court noted, both parties contributed the same amount of marital funds—$18,500 a year—toward their respective 401(k) accounts during the marriage. The fact that defendant’s account grew more than plaintiff’s account was simply because he had substantially more in his account before the parties were married. Under the circumstances of this case, by awarding each party their own appreciated 401(k) accounts, the trial court achieved a fair and equitable settlement.


Aldrich Legal Services understands what a stressful time this is for you when you have property settlement issues.

Aldrich Legal Services represent parties throughout southeast Michigan with a wide range of divorce related matters.

Contact Aldrich Legal Services

Speak to a Pro: (734) 404-3000

Michigan Expungement Law Updates For 2021

There has been a new laws regarding expungements for the state of Michigan.  Gov. Gretchen Whitmer signed legislation that expands the criteria for expungements related to traffic offenses, marijuana convictions, and minor...

Wills and Trusts

Originally posted on: 02/14/2014 Aldrich Legal Service provides legal advice and representation for residents in Plymouth, Ann Arbor, and Southeast Michigan. We also review recent legal cases to examine what took place and what we can...

REAL ESTATE 68: Holding that plaintiffs-buyers’ allegations of fraud in this case arising from the sale of a residence did not preclude the trial court from granting defendants’ motion for summary disposition based on a release, the court affirmed.

This cause of action arises from plaintiffs’ purchase of a residence from defendant, who had rights in the house under a land contract from co-defendant, the legal owner of the house. Before the house was for sale, in January 2018, an upstairs...

REAL ESTATE 65: Determining that it could not conclude the trial court erred in its factual findings, and that it did not err in reforming a 2005 deed, the court affirmed the ruling that defendants were fee simple owners of the disputed 50-foot area

This case arose from a real-property dispute between brothers, as well as their respective wives. After a bench trial, the trial court rendered its findings of fact. The trial court determined that plaintiffs did not prove that excluding the...

FAMILY LAW 58: The trial court did not err by denying defendant-father’s motion to change custody and modify his parenting time of the parties’ child without having an evidentiary hearing to determine if there was proper cause or a change in circums

This case arose from a custody and parenting-time dispute between plaintiff-mother and father over their minor child. After father failed to respond to the paternity complaint within the 21 days of receipt of the complaint, mother filed an affidavit...

DIVORCE 53: Although the court affirmed the trial court’s decisions to deny defendant’s motions to set aside the default and the default JOD, it vacated the portions of the default JOD as to the distribution of marital property, custody, parenting t

Plaintiff filed for divorce. Defendant filed an answer and a counterclaim for divorce.  Plaintiff and defendant were both ordered to appear at the settlement conference. After defendant failed to appear, the trial court entered a default. Soon...

FAMILY LAW 53: The trial court erred by treating the parties’ GAL as an LGAL and denying the parties the right to question her at a hearing; however, the trial court did not err in requiring the parties to compensate the GAL for her services.

Plaintiff and Defendant were never married, but share a young son who was born in 2016. The parties have battled over custody, child support, and other parenting issues ever since. In the spring of 2019, the parties filed competing motions to modify...

The Difference Between Theft, Robbery, and Burglary

Original Post: 1/11/2019 Often, burglary, robbery, and theft are used interchangeably even though there are distinct differences between all of them. Though, what all three do have in common is they may involve the unlawful taking of...

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
and secure reliable and trustworthy representation today!
Get the Help You Need From a Team You Can Truly Count On: (734) 404-3000