The trial court erroneously referred this custody case to the Friend of the Court without first determining whether there was proper cause or a change in circumstances that necessitated a review of custody and parenting time, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

The trial court in this custody matter improperly refused to hold an evidentiary hearing on the plaintiff-mother’s request to modify custody and parenting time, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

Trial court properly denied the plaintiff-mother’s objections to the FOC referee’s recommendation that sole legal and physical custody be awarded to the defendant-father.

The trial court erroneously applied a change-of-circumstances standard to the Friend of the Court’s petition to modify child support, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

The trial court in this case wrongly imposed restrictions on a father’s parenting time of his three minor children, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

The trial court improperly relied on the consequences of a parent’s voluntary change of custody as being sufficient to constitute proper cause or a change of circumstances to order a change of custody.

The father was erroneously granted joint physical & legal custody, because the trial court improperly conflated his motion to change custody with the mother’s motion to change domicile.

The trial court failed to conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine whether she had established the required proper cause or change in circumstances.

Even though the trial court did not conduct an interview with the parties’ children regarding their custody preferences, the decision to grant the plaintiff-mother sole legal custody was appropriate.

In Brenner, the appeal by right deadline had been missed, leaving an application for leave to appeal as the only option for appellate review.

A trial court correctly denied a father’s request to 1) change the parenting time schedule and 2) remove a right-of-first-refusal provision from the parties’ divorce judgment.

he evidence in a custody action demonstrated that a change in circumstances had occurred and, therefore, the trial court wrongly denied a mother’s motion to modify a custody order.

In D’itri v Bollinger, the mother of the child filed a motion to change custody claiming there was a change in circumstances in the child’s living situation.

The Court of Appeals found the actions of the Livingston Circuit Court and a FOC Referee acted "grossly improper" in their decision-making and procedures in a custody case.

The Court of Appeals in Frowner v Smith, addressed whether a parent has to satisfy the Vodvarka threshold to change custody from a third party custodian.

In Powery v Wells, the COA affirmed a trial court’s order changing custody of a minor child based on the mother’s move from Ludington to Traverse City.