Judicial estoppel barred Plaintiff-Appellant's claims that depended on an ownership interest in the property, as she had previously denied such an interest in her bankruptcy petition. However, judicial estoppel did not preclude her claim for unjust enrichment or quantum meruit.

The Michigan Supreme Court will not decide a dispute over a divorced couple’s cryogenically frozen embryo, saying it was “not persuaded” the justices should review the issues presented.

In this suit contesting the validity of a divorce judgment, the trial court correctly held that it did not have subject-matter jurisdiction and, as a result, properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary disposition, 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 Michigan Supreme Court will not hear the appeal in a termination of parental rights case.

The trial court properly awarded the divorced parties’ one remaining frozen embryo to the ex-husband, a split Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

An attorney fee award in this divorce action must be vacated, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled, because the trial court did not make a finding as to whether the requested fee was reasonable.

DHHS’s petition to terminate parental rights was declined because the petition did not establish probable cause that the father posed a substantial risk of harm to the children’s mental well-being.

An adult sibling has standing to initiate child-protective proceedings against his parents over the care of his minor sister.

In this divorce case, the COA adopted a new legal framework that “blends” the “contractual approach” and the “balancing approach” to determine the disposition of a frozen embryo.

The Michigan Supreme Court is currently considering a case involving the denial of a residential tenant’s request for a “reasonable accommodation”.

A trial court erred by denying the petitioner’s request for a personal protection order (PPO) based on the prior denial of a similar PPO request by the petitioner.

The trial court also held the defendant’s former legal counsel, the law firm of Neda, Camaj & Fakhouri, PC, jointly and severally liable for the fees. The law firm appealed the ruling.

A Bingham Farms attorney was properly held in criminal contempt for taping trial court proceedings without first obtaining the judge’s permission.

A trial court abused its discretion by not articulating a reason for awarding only a portion of the attorney fees that appointed appellate counsel had requested.

The Court of Appeals explained it is “axiomatic” that there be an “actual agreement on the essential features of the plea” for a plea agreement to be valid.