The Michigan Court of Appeals recently handed down another lulu of a decision. In Fisher v. Fisher (Published decision, dated August 28, 2007). In this ruling a panel of the Court (Davis, Schuette and Borrello) held that there are no refunds for overpayment of child support.
The story goes like this: Grant and Joanne Fisher divorced in 1992. At that time Grant agreed to pay $80 per week in child support. Six years later, the court increased his weekly payment to $117. In 1999, the court determined that Grant's only source of income came from his Social Security disability benefits, so the Friend of the Court again modified the order and began to withhold $510.80 per month from his check to cover his obligation to Joanne. This is where things get a little weird.
Even with all those withholdings, Grant Fisher managed somehow to rack up more than $18,000 in arrearages in his support payments. But at the same time, Joanne ended up collecting nearly $20,000 in excess child support payments. It just gets curiouser and curiouser. This is how she did it: in addition to receiving the funds that were being withheld from Grant's disability checks, Joanne also applied for and began receiving Social Security benefits directly on behalf of the child. The dependant child of an individual on social security disability is also entitled to payments. With all those payments rolling in to Joanne directly from Grant and also from the social security administration , Grant was eventually able to get square on the arrearage. He also overpaid by $20,000. Joanne evidently never bothered to mention to Grant that she was receiving the double payments.
When Grant realized how much Joanne had actually received, he wisely took her to court seeking reimbursement for all those overpayments ($20,000 is a ton of money to almost everyone, but think what it means to someone in Grant's position who is disabled).
The opinion, authored by Judge Alton T. Davis, held that she gets to keep the money: "The relief plaintiff seeks is precluded by MCL 552.603. That statue establishes that 'each support payment [is] the equivalent of a final judgment and prohibit[s] retroactive modification' thereof." This translates into the Friend of the Court doesn't have to give refunds even when it's wrong.
So, Grant Fisher, and every other parent who has overpaid, loses. It is up to each parent paying support carefully monitor the amount he or she is paying because the courts won't do it for you and the Court of Appeals won't give it back to you if you pay too much. Anytime your income changes, seek a modification. This decision would seem to create an added incentive for unscrupulous parents to try to engineer as much overpayment as possible. While the situation in this case is unusual because there was a simultaneous payment being made directly by the government along with the one by Grant, Joanne will never answer for what amounts to a grand deception.
On the bright side, since this was child support, there is some consolation in knowing that Grant's hardship directly or indirectly benefited his child. Which is really the point, I suppose.
Click here for the full text of the decision: Fisher v. Fisher.
No comments:
Post a Comment