The parties were
divorced in 2005. The judgment of divorce awarded defendant-wife one-half of
the marital interest in plaintiff-husband’s pension and retirement benefits in a
Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO). Ten years and eight days after entry
of the divorce judgment, defendant submitted a proposed QDRO to the trial
court, which was entered without objection. Several months later, after the
pension plan rejected the proposed QDRO because of deficiencies in the draft
language, defendant submitted an amended proposed QDRO. Plaintiff filed
objections to entry of the amended proposed QDRO on grounds unrelated to the
statute of limitations. Plaintiff then moved to set aside the first proposed
QDRO and to deny the amended proposed QDRO, claiming that entry of any QDRO was
barred by the ten-year statute of limitations applicable to enforcement of
noncontractual money obligations in MCL 600.5809(3). The trial court denied
plaintiff’s motion and entered the amended proposed QDRO. In an unpublished
opinion, the Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that it was bound by Joughin v Joughin, 320 Mich App 380
(2017), which held that a former spouse’s submission of a proposed QDRO is merely
a ministerial task attendant to the judgment of divorce that is not subject to
the statute of limitations period in MCL 600.5809(3). The Supreme Court has
directed oral argument on plaintiff’s application for leave to appeal to address:
(1) whether plaintiff waived any statute of limitations defense; (2)
whether Joughin was correctly
decided; and (3) when a claim for retirement benefits under a judgment of
divorce accrues.