Speaker Law
Blog

In the case of In re Conservatorship of Rhea Brody, No. 332994, the Michigan Court of Appeals (MCOA), affirmed the lower court’s appointment of a conservator over Rita Brody, an adult, under the Estates and Protected Individuals Code (EPIC) MCL 700.5101 et seq.

The case of Ray v Swager, No: 322766, came to the Michigan Court of Appeals (MCOA) on remand from the Michigan Supreme Court. In the first appeal to the MCOA, Eric Swager appealed the trial court’s denial of his motion for summary disposition. The MCOA reversed the trial court’s decision and remanded for entry of summary disposition in Swager’s favor based on the conclusion that reasonable minds could not conclude that Swager was “the proximate cause” of plaintiff Ray’s injuries.

Kevin Clark and Erica Kosinski had a child together. Their tumultuous relationship ended in a child custody dispute. During that time, Clark found listening devices and GPS tracking devices concealed in the child’s clothing during his parenting time.

In In re Miller Minors, newborn twins were born at the hospital, where the mother surrendered them. As permitted by the statute, the mother (Surrendering Parent) did not identify the father. Pursuant to the statute, the hospital social worker attempted to learn as much as she could about both the surrendering parent and non-surrendering parent-again where the surrendering parent is not required to give any information. The hospital contacted an adoption agency, who placed the twins with prospective adoptive parents.

A defendant must understand their plea before it can be entered in front of the court. With juveniles, MCR 3.941(C) says “the court shall tell the juvenile: the possible dispositions.” At a very basic level this means that the defendant must understand the consequences of what will come as a result of their plea.

In the case of In re Detmer/Beaudry, Minor, No.336348, the two minor children, AB and KD, and their mother are members of the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians (the Tribe) and thus, when AB was “removed” from his mother, the special protections of the Michigan Indian Family Preservation Act (MIFPA) applied. Because the trial court didn’t comply with those protections, the Michigan Court of Appeals (MCOA) vacated the court’s order and remanded for further proceedings.

In three consolidated cases, Hegadorn v DHHS, No. 329508, the court looked at the individual funding of long-term care under Medicaid deciding that assets placed by an institutionalized individual’s spouse into a “Solely for the Benefit of” Trust (“SBO Trust”) are countable assets for determining whether the institutionalized individual is eligible for Medicaid benefits.