The Court of Appeals released a lengthy published opinion in Riemer v Johnson, that addressed many issues including custody, parenting time, child support, and attorney's fees.

The Court of Appeals decided in Adam v Bell, and overturned an order granting summary disposition to State Farm on the grounds that Cynthia Adam’s claims were barred by res judicata.

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

In Heiden v Heiden, the COA used the statutory rules governing binding domestic-relations alternative dispute resolution to set aside a common law mediation agreement that purported to divide the parties' property for their judgment of divorce.

In In re Dorsey, the appellant's son had been adjudicated delinquent and was subject to the jurisdiction of the family division of the circuit court.

The Court of Appeals addressed a narrow issue regarding defamation cases: "whether statements made to police regarding criminal activity are absolutely privileged and therefore immune from suit for defamation."

In Bhama v Garves, the Court of Appeals found an appeal regarding legal malpractice by an in pro per psychiatrist to be frivolous.

The Court of Appeals affirmed in part and reversed in part a Judgment of Divorce, ruling in favor of Sherri Richards, a client of the Speaker Law Firm, on all appealed issues.

The COA held that a presumed father, ie, a mother's husband at the time of conception or birth of a child, is a necessary party to a Revocation of Paternity Act claim.

The COA addressed an issue debated among family law attorneys: whether a party could seek to modify and extend an award of spousal support set by a trial court in the parties’ judgment of divorce.

The Michigan SCT has taken up a proposal for a court rule proposal regarding the publication standards and the citation to unpublished opinions. The proposal emanated from the Michigan COA.

Usually when appellate judges write opinions, it is based on the facts or the law or sometimes even public policy. And appellate judges, like appellate lawyers, usually present their opinions in a very restrained fashion.

The Court of Appeals published two cases this week in child welfare cases. The first In re Kanjia and the second in In re McCarrick/Lamoreaux.

On May 13, 2014, in an unpublished opinion, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that a payor’s spousal support may be increased on the basis of a new spouse’s income. I

Judges should expect their orders to be followed. So it did not surprise me when I read an article reposted in Michigan Lawyers Weekly (about a Lenawee County Circuit Court Judge who was angry at jurors who did not follow her court order.

At the end of last year, the COA, clarified the amount of due process required when an attorney seeks enforcement of charging liens secured by a divorce judgment signed by the client debtor.

On April 15, 2014, in a published decision, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that absences attributable to fear of bullying were not “willful” absences under MCL 712A.2(a)(4).

On December 10, 2013, in an unpublished opinion, the Michigan Court of Appeals upheld sanctions for the violation of a consent order that was entered after the discovery deadline had already passed.