The trial court’s decision to suspend Mother’s parenting time had the effect of modifying the award of joint physical custody in the consent judgment of divorce, and MCR 3.207 did not apply to the case.

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 committed clear legal error by failing to hold a live hearing where the plaintiff would have the right to present evidence, subject to certain restrictions permitted by the court rules.

A trial court erroneously treated a father’s motion to designate a school for his child as a motion for change of physical custody.

A trial court properly issued an order requiring that the parties’ child be vaccinated by a pediatrician and for the parties to select a new, mutually agreeable pediatrician for the child.

The Court of Appeals further held that remand was necessary to address the father’s request to modify parenting time.

The trial court received additional evidence, considered the statutory best-interest factors, and found by clear and convincing evidence that primary custody with plaintiff was in the child’s best interests.