Whether your clients are navigating divorce, incapacity, or planning for guardianship, understanding the legal overlap between probate and family law is essential for effective counsel.
Judge Tina M. Yost Johnson and Elizabeth K. Bransdorfer shared practical insights cases that address the overlap between probate and family law in an ICLE on-demand seminar.
Below are two crossover issues covered in their discussion, designed to help you avoid pitfalls and guide your clients through critical issues.
Want more?
It’s one of the thousands of resources available in ICLE’s Premium Partnership.
1. Intersection of Guardianship Proceedings and Family Visits
Case: In Million v Warner (In re ADW), No 368361, ___ Mich App ___, ___ NW3d ___ (Mar 14, 2024).
Key Issue: Can a probate court order visits with extended family members in minor guardianship proceedings?
• In this case, the probate court appointed ADW’s paternal half-sibling as her temporary guardian. The court then ordered that ADW participate in visits with her maternal half-siblings, believing it was in the best interest for the child.
• The appellate court reversed the visitation order, stating that guardians have the powers and responsibilities of a parent, including the power to prohibit visitation with nearly all relatives. Therefore, the court lacked authority to enter an order for visitation with extended family members.
Practical Implications: While there are statutory provisions that allow parties to seek grandparenting time, these provisions do not exist for other extended family.
2. Intersection of Divorce Settlements and Estate Planning
Case: Lyden v Lyden (In re E Earl Lyden Tr), No 362112, ___ Mich App ___, ___ NW3d ___ (Apr 4, 2024), leave to appeal denied, No 167018, ___ Mich ___, 12 NW3d 621 (2024)
Key Issue: During the pendency of a divorce, what happens if one spouse executes a restatement of their trust to disinherit the other spouse?
• In this case, a wife consented to losing her beneficiary status in her husband’s retirement account, expecting support from his trust after divorce.
• The husband died before the settlement was finalized, but prior to his death, the husband amended his trust to provide for his son from a previous marriage and effectively disinherited his wife. The wife was left without support.
• The court held that while public policy disfavors defrauding one’s spouse, if there is no fraudulent intent, a spouse may use an inter vivos trust to disinherit the other spouse. Soltis v First of America Bank-Muskegon, 203 Mich App 435, 513 NW2d 148 (1994).
Practical Implications: It is risky for clients to implement major settlement terms (such as changing beneficiaries) before a signed judgment. Premature changes can leave parties unprotected if circumstances change.
This summary of ICLE resources was created with the assistance of AI.
