A father convicted of sexually abusing his young daughter was denied his right to confrontation under the Sixth Amendment, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled, because the trial court did not first make a finding that “screened” testimony of the child victim, which was allowed by state law, was necessary.

In determining whether changing schools was in the best interests of the parties’ child, the trial court improperly excluded a report about the school district.

The trial court erroneously admitted an exhibit that contained hearsay and, as a result, the adjudication, termination order and injunctive order must all be vacated.

A Michigan trial court has been instructed to scrutinize whether a divorce settlement is unenforceable because the mediator in the case did not conduct the domestic violence screening.

In this custody dispute, the trial court properly granted the plaintiff-father sole legal and physical custody of the children and awarded the defendant-mother no parenting time.

A settlement agreement signed by the parties in this divorce action was valid and enforceable, even though the mediator did not conduct any domestic violence screening.

The trial court didn’t err when it modified the mother’s parenting time, found that a change in circumstances had occurred and that a change in custody was in the child’s best interests.

The MI Supreme Court released a unanimous decision in People v Stevens, where it reversed a defendant's conviction for second degree murder and child abuse and remanded to the trial court