McVeigh v. First Trust Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the defendant’s 2005 motion to amend a QDRO entered in 1993 was untimely and unreasonable to the extent that it could be interpreted as a motion for relief from the judgment under MCR 2.612
• holding the provisions of the contemporaneous QDRO must be treated as part of the settlement because the parties approved the content of the judgment of divorce at the same time they approved the initial QDRO referred to by the judgment of divorce
• holding the provisions of the contemporaneous QDRO must be treated as part of the settlement because the parties approved the content of the judgment of divorce at the same time they approved the initial QDRO referred to by the judgment of divorce

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).