The Michigan Court of Appeals, in a custody case on remand from the Michigan Supreme Court, has ruled that a portion of its original opinion “erroneously instructed the trial court to apply MCL 722.31 to determine the child’s domicile.”

The trial court “committed clear legal error” in this custody case by not applying the “parental presumption” or making the required best-interest determination before ordering that the plaintiff-mother’s child remain with the defendant, a putative father who had no legal rights to the child.

The trial court in this equitable-parent doctrine case correctly ruled the plaintiff did not establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that she and the defendant would have married but for the then-existing ban on same-sex marriage, the Michigan COA decided.

This custody and parenting-time case must be remanded because the trial court once again committed various errors in making its decisions.

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 defendant is entitled to relief, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled, because the trial court erred in several respects.

Under the equitable parent doctrine, a would-be equitable parent of a child born or adopted in same-sex marriage may seek custody and parent time.

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 did not make sufficient findings under each of the best-interest factors, the Michigan COA remanded the case so the trial judge could make “explicit” findings.

The MI COA has ruled, for the first time, that the preponderance of the evidence standard applies in Special Immigrant Juvenile proceedings because the statute is silent on this issue.

The trial court’s decision to vacate the custody and parenting-time provisions in the parties’ divorce judgment must be reversed, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

The plaintiff in this child-custody case is not a “natural parent” under the equitable parent doctrine and did not establish the necessary elements for third-person standing under the Child Custody Act.

The trial court properly awarded a father sole physical custody of his minor children, because there were legitimate concerns regarding the children’s medical care and parenting-time exchanges.

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 correctly modified the parties’ custody order to give the mother sole legal and physical custody of the children.

The Michigan Court of Appeals has upheld a probate court order granting a paternal grandparent’s petition to be named guardian of her son’s two minor children.