KATHLEEN MANN V BRIAN PISCHKE
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
KATHLEEN MANN,
UNPUBLISHED
March 6, 2007
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v
No. 265561
Wayne Circuit Court
LC No. 01-112515-DM
BRIAN PISCHKE,
Defendant-Appellee.
Before: Borrello, P.J., and Jansen and Cooper, JJ.
JANSEN, J. (concurring in part and dissenting in part).
I agree with the majority’s conclusion that, under the 2004 amendments to the SERF,1
any change in circumstances will permit application of the SERF to a modification, even if the
SERF was not applied in the initial determination. I write separately, however, because I do not
believe that the change in circumstances must have been “relevant when the parties agreed upon
the initial judgment.” Under the plain language of the child support manual, the SERF “should
be applied to . . . modifications based upon changed circumstances at the time of modification.”
2004 Michigan Child Support Formula Manual, § 3.05(D) (emphasis added). The fact that the
parties in this case were divorced by way of a consent judgment has no bearing on this language.
Accordingly, so long as a change in circumstances is evident at the time of modification, it is
irrelevant that the change in circumstances may not have been relevant or anticipated by the
parties at the time of the initial judgment.
I further disagree with the majority’s observation that no change in circumstances
occurred in this case. The trial court evidently relied solely on the Friend of the Court
recommendation and the decision in Calley2 to find a change in circumstances, and apparently
did not rely on any other information in reaching its decision. I would not simply conclude that
the trial court was incorrect and that no change in circumstances occurred. Nor would I reverse
the trial court’s decision outright. Instead, I would remand to allow the trial court to consider
1
2004 Michigan Child Support Formula Manual, § 3.05(D)
2
Calley v Calley, 197 Mich App 380; 496 NW2d 305 (1992).
-1-
any additional information or evidence that is relevant to the question whether a change in
circumstances had in fact occurred at the time of modification.
/s/ Kathleen Jansen
-2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.