Permanent Resident Alien Status

This arose in Gubin v. Lodisev, 197 Mich App 84 (1992) where the non-holding spouse claimed a share of the value. The court believed that valuation was "not impossible" but refused to value the status as an asset where it was viewed as unseemly to place a value on "having citizenship in this country". The court also was concerned that "a resident alien may encourage others to marry for a possible profit motive rather than for more traditional reasons." This is one of the all-time whoppers in the history of Michigan appellate law. Let me count the ways. No, Iíll let you do it. Clues. 1. We all know, for example, that marriage is never based upon financial considerations---that this is never one of the "traditional reasons". 2. Also consider the following conversation---

Ms. A: OK, Iíll marry you. How much?

Mr. B: Letís not worry about it. Once we get divorced the court will award something consistent with Gubin v. Lodisev.


Ms. A: OK, Iíll marry you. How much?

Mr. B: How about $ 10,000?

Ms. A: Call it 20k.

We know, for example, that a distinct ruling by the court in Lodisev would have eliminated the second conversation in favor of the first.

In any event Lodisev seems the right result and there has there has been no reported litigation on the question since that time. The courtís ultimate holding that "an award on this basis (permanent resident alien status) may not only be speculative, but also premature", seems sound. Id at 94. Particularly so where the status could be revoked by the government at some future time. And, anyway, wasnít Ms. Gubin a citizen?