Divorce judgment; Enforcement of judgment; Relief from judgment; MCR 2.612(C); Life insurance policies; Statute of limitations; MCL 600.5809(3); Waiver; Divorce court jurisdiction; Third-party beneficiaries; Property settlement; Estes v Titus; Reed v Reed; Kasper v Metropolitan Life Ins Co

The court held that defendant-ex-husband waived his statute-of-limitations defense to plaintiff-ex-wife’s request to enforce the divorce judgment, but that the trial court exceeded its authority by awarding the parties’ children ownership of life insurance policies. The divorce judgment awarded the parties joint ownership of State Farm life insurance policies on the lives of their children, but plaintiff later moved to enforce or clarify the judgment after defendant allegedly failed to make her a joint owner. On appeal, the court held that the enforcement request was governed by MCL 600.5809(3)’s 10-year limitation period, but defendant waived that defense by failing to raise it in his first responsive pleading. The court next held that defendant did not comply with the judgment because making plaintiff a successor owner “gave plaintiff no rights of ownership unless something happened to defendant.” But it also held that the trial court lacked authority to order the policies transferred to the children because a divorce court may adjudicate only the rights of the spouses and “lacks the authority to compel a party to convey property” to third parties absent an incorporated agreement requiring that result. Because the record did not show such an agreement, the court vacated the order awarding the policies to the children and remanded.