Court Opinion

ID: 9571841
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 20:35:40.300297+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:31:05.275850
License: Public Domain

Fitzgerald, J.
(concurring in part and dissenting in part). I respectfully dissent from the majority’s conclusion that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in dividing the parties’ property. The trial judge admitted confusion regarding the property division, but gave no explanation for the substantial disparity in the property award, which gave plaintiff approximately seventy percent of the parties’ marital assets. Because we review the trial court’s division of the marital estate de novo, and will not reverse unless we are convinced that we would have reached a different result had we been in the trial court’s place, Burkey v Burkey (On Rehearing), 189 Mich App 72, 78; 471 NW2d 631 (1991), I would remand so that the trial court can state on the record the reasons for its significant departure from an approximately equal division of property, Knowles v Knowles, 185 Mich App 497, 501; 462 NW2d 777 (1990), and I would retain jurisdiction.