Source: Couple fights for family with lawsuit seeking gay joint adoption, By David Ashenfelter, Detroit Free Press
On Monday, April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse, a lesbian couple from Oakland County, filed suit in federal court to attempt to change the law in Michigan as it relates to gay, lesbian and heterosexual couples jointly adopting children. Currently, the couple has three children; DeBoer is the adoptive parent to their daughter and Rowse is the adoptive parent of their sons. But under the current law in Michigan, neither of them can legally adopt the other child(ren), giving each of the children two adoptive parents.
The women, both of whom are nurses and state-certified foster parents, want to change the law so that in the event that something happens to one of them, the other parent would be the child(ren)'s legal parent and be able to keep the child(ren). Also, the children would have more benefits available to them by having two legal parents, including Social Security benefits, workers compensation, pensions, insurance, and the right to have at least one parent available to make decisions if the other parent is unavailable or incapacitated.
Currently, the Michigan Constitution prohibits same-sex couples from marrying. A separate state law prohibits a second parent from adopting if the couple isn't married.
We will keep you posted on this important pending lawsuit.
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Sunday, January 22, 2012
Tape record another at your peril
By: Carole L. Chiamp
Too often a new client comes in with tape recorded evidence which negatively impacts the other spouse. The client knows nothing about the Michigan or federal eavesdropping law. Unfortunately, serious consequences are in store for the unwary eavesdropper.
There are several laws to which someone recording a conversation must adhere. One is MCL §758.539 which provides that if a person eavesdropping may be guilty of a two year felony, a fine of $2,000. In civil court, an injunction to stop the eavesdropping, money damages for each instance of violation of the law and punitive damages are available to the victim of an unlawful eavesdrop.
Sullivan v Gray, a Michigan case, provides:
The operative language of MCL 750.539c; MSA 28.807(3) prohibits a person from "wilfully [using] any advice to eavesdrop upon [a] conversation without the consent of all parties thereto." As used in the statute, the term "eavesdrop" means to "overhear", record, amplify or transmit any part of the private discourse of others without the permission of all persons engaged in the discourse". MCL 750.539a(2); MSA 28.807(1)(2). We believe the statutory language, on its face, unambiguously excludes participant recording from the definition of eavesdropping by limiting the subject conversation to "the private discourse of others". The statute contemplates that a potential eavesdropper must be a third party not otherwise involved in the conversation being eavesdropped on. Had the Legislature desired to include participants within the definition, the phrase "of others" might have been excluded or changed to "of others or with others".
A common situation for a divorcing litigant is to install a device, without the other spouse’s knowledge, in order to record telephone conversations with a priest, marriage counselor, attorney and friends. The law is not clear in every state but Michigan and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, enforcing a federal eavesdropping statute, finds those conversations inadmissible in any state of federal proceeding. Additionally parents have no right to consent on behalf of a minor to the interception of a conversation in which the parent is not a participant.
There are legal ways to record another which are too detailed to present here. If you want additional information, seek specific information BEFORE taking action. A good article on the subject can be found here, by attorney Renee C. Walsh.
Too often a new client comes in with tape recorded evidence which negatively impacts the other spouse. The client knows nothing about the Michigan or federal eavesdropping law. Unfortunately, serious consequences are in store for the unwary eavesdropper.
There are several laws to which someone recording a conversation must adhere. One is MCL §758.539 which provides that if a person eavesdropping may be guilty of a two year felony, a fine of $2,000. In civil court, an injunction to stop the eavesdropping, money damages for each instance of violation of the law and punitive damages are available to the victim of an unlawful eavesdrop.
Sullivan v Gray, a Michigan case, provides:
The operative language of MCL 750.539c; MSA 28.807(3) prohibits a person from "wilfully [using] any advice to eavesdrop upon [a] conversation without the consent of all parties thereto." As used in the statute, the term "eavesdrop" means to "overhear", record, amplify or transmit any part of the private discourse of others without the permission of all persons engaged in the discourse". MCL 750.539a(2); MSA 28.807(1)(2). We believe the statutory language, on its face, unambiguously excludes participant recording from the definition of eavesdropping by limiting the subject conversation to "the private discourse of others". The statute contemplates that a potential eavesdropper must be a third party not otherwise involved in the conversation being eavesdropped on. Had the Legislature desired to include participants within the definition, the phrase "of others" might have been excluded or changed to "of others or with others".
A common situation for a divorcing litigant is to install a device, without the other spouse’s knowledge, in order to record telephone conversations with a priest, marriage counselor, attorney and friends. The law is not clear in every state but Michigan and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, enforcing a federal eavesdropping statute, finds those conversations inadmissible in any state of federal proceeding. Additionally parents have no right to consent on behalf of a minor to the interception of a conversation in which the parent is not a participant.
There are legal ways to record another which are too detailed to present here. If you want additional information, seek specific information BEFORE taking action. A good article on the subject can be found here, by attorney Renee C. Walsh.
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Don’t forget to divide social security benefits at divorce
By: Carole L. Chiamp
A recent Michigan divorce case discussed the division of social security benefits (Biondo v Biondo, C of A No. 294694, 3/15/11, ___ Mich App ___ (2011)).
In a case where a spouse works outside the home and the other spouse is a homemaker and raises the children the worker receives a social security benefit at retirement usually two times as much as the non-working spouse (assuming the parties were married ten years which qualifies the non-working spouse to receive social security benefits through the spouse). Some attorneys ignore social security benefits which result in the non-earning spouse receiving one-half of the benefit received by the working spouse. This case allows the non-working spouse to receive a fair amount which may be more than one-half.
The Court of Appeals joins the majority of state courts that have considered this question and hold that the circuit court may consider the parties anticipated social security benefits as one factor, among others to be considered, when devising an equitable distribution of marital property. The court cautioned that in dividing the marital estate, the court may not treat social security benefits as tantamount to a marital asset. Instead, the circuit court may take into account in a general sense, the extent to which social security benefits received by the parties affect the Sparks factors. The court sent the case back to the circuit court for consideration of this issue.
This case is important to divorcing parties, especially those reaching social security age, or those actually receiving social security benefits.
A recent Michigan divorce case discussed the division of social security benefits (Biondo v Biondo, C of A No. 294694, 3/15/11, ___ Mich App ___ (2011)).
In a case where a spouse works outside the home and the other spouse is a homemaker and raises the children the worker receives a social security benefit at retirement usually two times as much as the non-working spouse (assuming the parties were married ten years which qualifies the non-working spouse to receive social security benefits through the spouse). Some attorneys ignore social security benefits which result in the non-earning spouse receiving one-half of the benefit received by the working spouse. This case allows the non-working spouse to receive a fair amount which may be more than one-half.
The Court of Appeals joins the majority of state courts that have considered this question and hold that the circuit court may consider the parties anticipated social security benefits as one factor, among others to be considered, when devising an equitable distribution of marital property. The court cautioned that in dividing the marital estate, the court may not treat social security benefits as tantamount to a marital asset. Instead, the circuit court may take into account in a general sense, the extent to which social security benefits received by the parties affect the Sparks factors. The court sent the case back to the circuit court for consideration of this issue.
This case is important to divorcing parties, especially those reaching social security age, or those actually receiving social security benefits.
Sunday, December 4, 2011
Holiday parenting time tips
Whether you are going through a divorce, newly divorced or have been divorced for a while, the holidays can be a difficult hurdle for you and your ex-spouse, er, co-parent to get through. Here are a few tips to help ease the stress and make things more memorable (in a positive way) for your children:
- Reach out to family and friends for support. You’ve heard the old saying, “the more the merrier.” It can be true that the more people you are around the better your mood will be.
- Start new traditions. The idea is to shake things up, do something different. Any past seasonal behaviors that were once wonderful but now dredge up negative emotions can be done away with and replaced by new and exciting activities.
- Try to focus on the positive with your children. If they come to you and express sadness, don’t dismiss their feelings but do remind them that change can be a good thing and due to the changes from the divorce they will now have two holiday celebrations to look forward to. Who wouldn’t enjoy that?
- Work with your ex-spouse in a co-operative manner. Share with each other the details of what you are buying the children and how you will be celebrating. The holidays really are about the kids, so the more you work together toward this goal, the happier the season will be.
See Tips for Surviving Christmas as a Divorced Parent, by Cathy Meyer, About.com Guide
Sunday, November 13, 2011
The documents you need at the end of life
By: Carole L. Chiamp
You should not be satisfied that you’ve completed an estate plan. The only way it will get used is if your heirs can find the document.
Most experts recommend creating a comprehensive folder of documents that family members can access in case of emergency. You can store those documents with an attorney, lock them away in a safe deposit box or keep them in a safe at home.
The Basics
● Original will or trust.
● Proof of ownership of housing, cemetery plots, vehicles, stocks and bonds, brokerage statements, partnership agreements, life insurance policies, loan documents, bank accounts, retirement documents.
● Power of attorney.
● Durable health-care form.
● Birth certificate, marriage license, divorce judgment.
Many millions of dollars are unclaimed year after year in life insurance, retirement accounts and bank accounts because heirs cannot find them or do not know of their existence.
Procrastination is not an option.
For an excellent article on this subject, see The 25 Documents You Need Before You Die by Saabira Chaudhuri, The Wall Street Journal Weekend Investor.
You should not be satisfied that you’ve completed an estate plan. The only way it will get used is if your heirs can find the document.
Most experts recommend creating a comprehensive folder of documents that family members can access in case of emergency. You can store those documents with an attorney, lock them away in a safe deposit box or keep them in a safe at home.
The Basics
● Original will or trust.
● Proof of ownership of housing, cemetery plots, vehicles, stocks and bonds, brokerage statements, partnership agreements, life insurance policies, loan documents, bank accounts, retirement documents.
● Power of attorney.
● Durable health-care form.
● Birth certificate, marriage license, divorce judgment.
Many millions of dollars are unclaimed year after year in life insurance, retirement accounts and bank accounts because heirs cannot find them or do not know of their existence.
Procrastination is not an option.
For an excellent article on this subject, see The 25 Documents You Need Before You Die by Saabira Chaudhuri, The Wall Street Journal Weekend Investor.
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Statewide Domestic Violence Information
As reported by the Michigan State Police, victims of domestic violence in Michigan totaled 101,388 in 2007, with 29,793 in Wayne County, 8,243 in Oakland County and 7,071 in Macomb County. That means 44% of all reported victims of domestic violence reside in the tri-county area.
Click here to see the State Bar of Michigan's list of available domestic violence online resources.
Click here to see the State Bar of Michigan's list of available domestic violence online resources.
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
2011 = Final year for Michigan charitable tax credits
From PetoskeyNews.com
Beginning in 2012, the Michigan tax code will include elimination of charitable tax credits. In order to take advantage of the tax credits before it's too late, Michigan residents (and businesses) have until the end of the year to make a contribution. Currently, the Michigan Income Tax or Michigan Business Tax codes allow for up to a 50 percent return on that investment. Gifts and sponsorships to public radio, colleges and universities, libraries and museums, homeless shelters and food banks also will be ineligible for state tax credits after Dec. 31.
For the full article, click here.
Beginning in 2012, the Michigan tax code will include elimination of charitable tax credits. In order to take advantage of the tax credits before it's too late, Michigan residents (and businesses) have until the end of the year to make a contribution. Currently, the Michigan Income Tax or Michigan Business Tax codes allow for up to a 50 percent return on that investment. Gifts and sponsorships to public radio, colleges and universities, libraries and museums, homeless shelters and food banks also will be ineligible for state tax credits after Dec. 31.
For the full article, click here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
