The two minor children of an immigrant who were granted asylum in the United States must be returned to their father in Venezuela, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in a 2-1 decision.

The trial court in this child-protective proceeding correctly placed the mother’s children under its jurisdiction because “some efforts” were made by DHHS to prevent removal of the children.

Even though the parties’ consent judgment of divorce included an offset provision, the defendant’s challenge to enforcing that provision is an improper collateral attack.

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 Supreme Court determined that reasonable efforts had not been made by the Department, as no service plan had been created to attempt to reunify the children with their mother.

The trial court in this child-welfare case did not make all the factual findings necessary to remove the minor child from her parents’ custody and, as a result, the removal order must be vacated.

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 Michigan COA has ruled that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal in a child-welfare case because trial counsel filed the appeal, and not the father whose parental rights were terminated.

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

The COA vacated the trial court’s order terminating mother’s parental rights because mother’s drug use during pregnancy does not qualify as an aggravated circumstance.

The MI SCT is considering whether to hear the case of a mother whose parental rights were terminated after the trial court agreed with the petitioning agency that she had subjected her children to “aggravated circumstances”.

The Court of Appeals vacated the Trial Court’s order terminating mother’s parental rights because mother’s drug use during pregnancy does not qualify as an aggravated circumstance.

The trial court properly dismissed this action for no-fault survivor’s loss benefits, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

The Michigan Supreme Court found that the Respondent's counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to cite to the record, citing incorrect legal standards in support of those claims, and failing to raise potentially meritorious claims.

The trial court properly terminated the respondent-mother’s parental rights because at least one of the statutory termination factors was met.

The Michigan Supreme Court vacated the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remanded the case for a new appeal due to the Respondent- Father's counsel providing ineffective assistance.

A trial court correctly denied a patient advocate’s request for an order directing that ivermectin be administered to her father, who was hospitalized with COVID-19.

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.