Michigan Court of Appeals· 3/15/2011
Biondo v. Biondo
Citations
- 291 Mich. App. 720
- 809 N.W.2d 397
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that social security benefits are relevant to contributions, necessities and circumstances, and the general principles of equity
- holding that a divorce court may consider social security benefits when formulating an equitable division of property
- holding that a trial court “may not treat social security benefits as tantamount to a marital asset,” but may “take into account, in a general sense” the extent to which those benefits bear on the factors related to property division
- holding that a trial court “may not treat social security benefits as tantamount to a marital asset,” but may “take into account, in a general sense” the extent to which those benefits bear on the factors related to property division
- “Generally, federal law does not preempt laws governing divorce or domestic relations, a legal arena belonging to the states rather than the United States.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Gleicher, Kelly, Stephens
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
6 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Chateau Foghorn LP v. HosfordCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 2017-08-28· cited 22×
- Dunmore v. DunmoreAlaska Supreme Court· 2018-05-11· cited 15×
- In re Marriage of MuellerIllinois Supreme Court· 2015-07-23· cited 4×
- In re the Marriage of HeraldCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2013-04-24· cited 1×
- In Re Guardianship of Anna-Marie Margaret BazakisMichigan Court of Appeals· 2022-06-23
- Tracy Diane Danielson v. Christopher John DanielsonCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin· 2024-09-11
Cites
11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Hisquierdo v. HisquierdoSupreme Court· 1979-01-22· cited 837×
- People v. KanaanMichigan Court of Appeals· 2008-04-17· cited 702×
- In Re the Marriage of MorehouseColorado Court of Appeals· 2005-02-24· cited 288×
- Sparks v. SparksMichigan Supreme Court· 1992-06-30· cited 264×
- Etefia v. Credit Technologies, IncMichigan Court of Appeals· 2001-04-27· cited 67×
- In Re the Marriage of BoyerSupreme Court of Iowa· 1995-09-20· cited 41×
- Buczkowski v. BuczkowskiMichigan Supreme Court· 1958-03-04· cited 38×
- Keyser v. KeyserMichigan Court of Appeals· 1990-02-05· cited 21×
- Konynenbelt v. Flagstar Bank, FSBMichigan Court of Appeals· 2000-10-03· cited 21×
- Depot v. DepotSupreme Judicial Court of Maine· 2006-03-29· cited 21×
- Villadsen v. VilladsenMichigan Court of Appeals· 1983-02-24· cited 10×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.