Court Opinion

ID: 9737445
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 19:25:23.307503+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:23:58.957104
License: Public Domain

Michael J. Kelly, J.
(concurring in part and dissenting in part). I concur with the majority except as to the award of alimony for an equitable interest in plaintiff’s law degree.
This is a close question; and, the amount being minimal, I. would have had no problem affirming such an award if the trial court had awarded alimony to defendant for his efforts in support of plaintiff’s earning her professional degree. However, I do not find error on this record because it is too close to call.
Even assuming some value to the law degree, we have no evidentiary support or testimony which compares that degree to the advanced degree obtained by the defendant husband during the relatively coextensive period. By his own admission, defendant contributed no direct financial support for the degree which was financed by the plaintiff through student loans and summer employment. Also we have no evidence pertaining to the parties’ respective nonmonetary contributions to the family well-being. I am not convinced I would have *157reached a different result. Perrin v Perrin, 169 Mich App 18; 425 NW2d 494 (1988). Also, the trial court’s account of the evidence in this regard is plausible and we should therefore be guided by Beason v Beason, 435 Mich 791; 460 NW2d 207 (1990).
I concur in the award to defendant of one-half the value of the real estate improvements, $3,950, but dissent as to the alimony award.