Several Speaker Law Firm Appeals Made the Michigan Lawyers Weekly “Most Important Decisions for January – June 2017” | Speaker Law
phone icon email icon
(517) 482-8933

Speaker Law
Blog

Several Speaker Law Firm Appeals Made the Michigan Lawyers Weekly “Most Important Decisions for January – June 2017”

Posted on Thursday, May 17, 2018

From the Michigan Lawyers Weekly July 3, 2017:
Family Law

Reliance on FOC findings is prohibited

               The court, itself, must find that there is adequate evidence to support a determination of whether proper cause or a sufficient change in circumstances exists to warrant an investigation into the best interests of a child, held the Michigan Court of Appeals in a published opinion.

               Bowling v. McCarrick; Michigan Lawyers Weekly July 3, 2017 Issue No. 07-93885, 3 pages

The court’s goal is equity

               Although marital property need not be divided equally, it must be divided equitably in light of a court’s evaluation of the parties’ contributions, faults and needs, held the Michigan Court of Appeals in a published opinion.

               Elahham v. Al-Jabban; Michigan Lawyers Weekly July 3, 2017 Issue No. 07-94159, 15 pages

Deference is owed to the parents’ decision

               Parents have a constitutionally protected right to raise their children as they see fit, therefore, if two fit parents both oppose visitation, their joint opposition effectively creates an irrebuttable presumption that denial of grandparenting time will not create a substantial risk of harm to the child, and the grandparents’ petition must be dismissed, held the Michigan Court of Appeals in a published opinion.

               Geering v. King; Michigan Lawyers Weekly July 3, 2017 Issue No. 07-94926, 6 pages

All factors need not be stated on the record

               Consideration of every factor need not be stated on the record; however, before permitting a change in a minor child’s legal residence, the court shall consider each of the factors set forth under MCL 722.31(4), with the child as the primary focus in the court’s deliberations, held the Michigan Court of Appeals in a published opinion.

               Yachcik v. Yachcik; Michigan Lawyers Weekly July 3, 2017 Issue No. 07-94107, 15 pages.

Probate Law

Attorney represents the conservator, not the estate

               An attorney hired to perform legal services for a conservator represents the conservator and does not have an attorney-client relationship with the estate, held the Michigan Court of Appeals in a published opinion.

               Estate of Tyler Jacob Maki v. Coen; Michigan Lawyers Weekly July 3, 2017 Issue No. 07-93797, 7 pages

Do you have an appeal?
Let's find out!

Recent
Posts

Interest In Well-Being Of Adult Child ‘Sufficient’ To Not Void Mom’s Auto Policy
Jun 3, 2020
An automobile liability policy should not be voided on public polic...
Trial Court Erroneously Ordered Child’s Surname Be Changed
May 27, 2020
A trial court improperly held that the surname of a child born out ...
MSC: Consent Divorce Judgment Preempted By Federal Law
May 20, 2020
A consent judgment of divorce under which the parties agreed that t...
Surviving Spouse Was Not ‘Willfully Absent’ During Divorce Proceedings
May 13, 2020
The defendant, Anne Jones-Von Greiff, was married to the decedent, ...

Tags

 

Subscribe to our blog

* indicates required