I WANT AN ANNULMENT!

                You are fed up with your marriage. Your spouse lies. You do not have a lot of property to divide, or you do not care to divide it. You just wish the marriage never took place. Can you seek an annulment to undo your marriage quickly, a la Brittney Spears?

                Probably not.

                A legal annulment is an annulment is a judicial determination that a valid marriage never took place. MCL 552.1. It is the appropriate means of dissolving two kinds of marriages—those that are void ab initio and those that are voidable. If a marriage is void ab initio, it is deemed never to have taken place since it was void from the beginning.  If a marriage is voidable, it is valid until one of the parties brings an action to have it annulled. The action must be brought while both parties are living, and until a court declares the marriage annulled, it is legally binding.

                The grounds for an annulment are limited. There are two statutes in Michigan setting the grounds that invalidate a marriage. Under MCL 552.1, the grounds that make a marriage “absolutely void” are

•a bigamous marriage,

•a marriage prohibited by the relationship of the parties, or

•a marriage with a person who is not capable in law of contracting.

This means, the law treats the marriage as if it never exists.

                A marriage is voidable if either of the parties is under the age of consent or consent was obtained by force or fraud. MCL 552.2.

To obtain an annulment, either party may file a petition or complaint for an annulment in the family division of the circuit court in the county where at least one of the parties resides. MCL 552.3. Jurisdiction for annulment, unlike divorce, does not depend on a specific length of residence. A resident of another state or country may file a petition as long as one party to the marriage is a resident of the county where the petition is filed. Hill v Hill, 354 Mich 475, 93 NW2d 157 (1958).  The petition and subsequent proceedings are the same as in a divorce proceeding. MCL 552.3. Generally speaking, this means there will be a trial if the grounds for annulment are disputed, as well as times to exchange witness lists, exhibit lists, trial briefs, etc., and discovery into the allegations. Child custody, parenting time and child support terms will be set, and property may still be divided.

                Thus, an annulment is not a quick way to undo a marriage. It may, however, be appropriate for religious purposes or to confirm a later marriage (in the event of alleged bigamy).

WE'RE A NO-FAULT STATE, RIGHT?

YES, BUT...

There’s a common misconception that “no-fault” divorce means fault is totally irrelevant – as if one spouse can have an affair and the affair means nothing because the divorce is “no fault.” That is incorrect. “No-fault” means neither party needs to prove the other party is at fault for the breakdown in the marriage, e.g. with a string of e-mails that chronicle a sordid affair, to obtain a divorce. “No fault” does not mean fault is totally irrelevant to the divorce.

In many states, like Michigan, fault is relevant to alimony, property division and child custody awards. There is a great variety among states because each has its own body of common law (the prior court opinions that may apply to the case) and its own statutes (the law “on the books” from the legislature). However, with the rise of “no fault” divorce statutes in the 1970s, a general trend emerged that fault could be an issue but not “the” issue for divorce. What was once a fault-focused case now became a case focused on fault only as it affected property, the need for or ability to pay alimony, and child custody.

In Welling v Welling, 233 Mich App 708, 592 NW2d 822 (1999), defendant claimed that the trial court had erred in concluding that his alcohol problems constituted marital fault, in its determination of spousal support and property division. The court of appeals affirmed the trial court, holding that the trial court did not clearly err. The court noted that the trial court did not consider defendant’s status as an alcoholic but referred to his behavior while he was drinking. The court, citing Sparks, stated that defendant’s conduct presented a greater reason for the breakdown of the relationship. The court also recognized that the trial court did not give inordinately excessive weight to this factor but also looked at the length of the marriage, the difference in the parties’ earnings, the fact that plaintiff had been out of the full-time workforce for most of the marriage, the fact that plaintiff needed to secure health insurance for herself after the divorce, and the fact that plaintiff had been struggling to make ends meet since the divorce.

Past conduct has long been recognized as a factor in the determination of spousal support. Johnson v Johnson, 346 Mich 418, 78 NW2d 216 (1956) (vile temper, obscene language, accusations of infidelity, and insanity deemed to have forced wife to file for divorce); Ianitelli v Ianitelli, 199 Mich App 641, 502 NW2d 691 (1993) (wife’s cohabitation with third party may not, by itself, be used later to support modification of spousal support); Demman v Demman, 195 Mich App 109, 489 NW2d 161 (1992) (defendant’s actions and uncaring attitude caused marital breakup); McNamara v McNamara, 178 Mich App 382, 443 NW2d 511 (1989), modified on other grounds, 436 Mich 862, 460 NW2d 222 (1990) (periodic spousal support could be used to compensate wife for her assistance in helping plaintiff attain his dental degree); Cloyd v Cloyd, 165 Mich App 755, 419 NW2d 455 (1988); Zecchin v Zecchin, 149 Mich App 723, 386 NW2d 652 (1986) (trial court wrongly found wife at fault because she asked husband to leave marital home; court should have looked at conduct of both parties); Davey v Davey, 106 Mich App 579, 308 NW2d 468 (1981); Abadi v Abadi, 78 Mich App 73, 259 NW2d 244 (1977) (wife feared personal danger from husband); Feldman v Feldman, 55 Mich App 147, 222 NW2d 2 (1974) (wife’s adultery taken into account by court in striking spousal support award); Van Ommen v Van Ommen, 25 Mich App 652, 181 NW2d 634 (1970) (wife’s failure to testify was improperly considered admission of “serious fault”).  

WHAT ARE MY OPTIONS FOR LEGALLY ENDING MY MARRIAGE?

There are three distinct ways to legally end a marriage relationship in Michigan: divorce, separate maintenance and annulment.

In a separate maintenance action, the parties are still technically married, but the court has already divided their property and debts and awarded spousal support, if any; these actions are usually maintained for health insurance or religious reasons, and they are rare. If the other party requests a divorce, the court will hear the divorce action instead.

In an annulment action, the court issues an order stating that the marriage never legally occurred. The grounds for an annulment include bigamy, fraud, insanity and attempted marriage of a minor. Like separate maintenance actions, annulment actions are also rare. In either action, child custody and child support proceed just as if the action were a divorce.

People seeking a divorce are often confused about the concept of fault as used in Michigan law. Michigan is a no-fault divorce state. The complaint for divorce need only allege that there has been a breakdown in the marriage relationship to the extent that the objects of matrimony have been destroyed and there remains no reasonable likelihood of reconciliation. This does not mean, however, that Michigan does not consider fault. Fault is relevant in some instances in child custody, spousal support and property distribution.

Read our detailed legal summary of Michigan including groups, residency, custody, child support, spousal support, and property to learn more.