On September 23, 2024, the Michigan Court of Appeals issued its opinion in the case of Qualls vs. Jenkins. In this case, the husband appealed the trial court determination that he was at fault during the course of the marriage when dividing marital property.
The most important case that describes how property is divided in a divorce is the case of Sparks v. Sparks. In the Sparks case, the Supreme Court determined what relevant factors a trial court should consider when dividing property. The relevant factors are:
- The length of the the marriage;
- The contributions of the parties to the marital estate;
- The age of the parties;
- The health of the parties;
- The life status of the parties;
- The necessities and circumstances of the parties;
- The earning ability of the parties;
- The past relations and conduct of the parties; and
- General principles of equity.
The past relations and conduct of the parties. (Fault)
“Fault is clearly a proper factor to consider in the division of marital property.”
Washington vs. Washington, 283 Mich. App. 667 (2009)
In determining fault as one of the Sparks factors, courts are to examine the conduct of the parties during the marriage. The question is, whether one party is more at fault, in the sense that one of the parties was the cause of the breakdown of the marriage. However, the Michigan Court of Appeals has cautioned trial court’s not to place to much emphasis on fault. Rather, fault is an element in the trial court’s desire to find a fair division of property.
In the Qualls vs. Jenkins case, the trial court determined that the husband was at fault for the breakdown of the marrital relationship in conceling substantial debt and “emotionally abandoning” the wife. The court noting that the husband misrepresented himself to his wife, in part by failing to inform his wife that he has not paid taxes in years. As a result of the Husband’s fault, the Michigan Court of Appeals upheld the trial court awarding wife a larger portion of the marital estate.
In Gill vs. Gill, a case argued by Daniel Findling / Findling Law, the Michigan Court of Appeals upheld a fault penalty against the husband arising from husbands “emotional abuse, drinking, and gambling.” The Michigan Court of Appeals noting that the award was not “intended to punish Gill”. Ratherm the property awards were based in large part on Wife’s disability and husband’s fault in this respect did result in dissipation of the parties’ assets.
In sum, fault can and does play a role in the division of property, however, a fault penalty is not intended to punish the wrongdoer, rather, fault is taken into consideration in making an equitable (fair) distribution of property after taking into account all of the Sparks factors.
By: Daniel Findling (c) 2024
Our Core Values.
Ph. 248-399-3300 : Email:Daniel@Findlinglaw.com : After hours emergency?+1 (248) 633-8583
I have been exclusively practicing divorce and family law in Michigan for almost 30 years. The attorneys at Findling Law all share the core value of practicing law to help people navigate change in their lives, without compromising principles. We specialize in high socio-economic, high-profile and high-conflict cases, while also working with clients of all backgrounds. We recognize that the most important aspect of the practice of law is the application of the law to your specific circumstances. That is why we provide more free information on divorce and family law than any other Michigan law firm. We want to help you manage your situation. Allow our exceptional legal team to help you navigate the change in your life, without compromising principles.
