Blog | Speaker Law
phone icon email icon
(517) 482-8933

Speaker Law
Blog

#
Posted: Jun 29, 2022, 10:00 AM
An award of sole legal custody to the father of the parties’ minor child must be reversed, the Michigan COA has ruled, because the trial court did not exercise “a proper degree of caution” and the issue of legal custody was not properly before the trial court.
Read More
#
Posted: Mar 23, 2022, 10:15 AM
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, because the trial court erroneously held that the defendant first had to establish paternity.
Read More
#
Posted: Dec 8, 2021, 10:00 AM
The Clare County trial court properly awarded a divorced father sole physical custody of his three minor children, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled, because there were legitimate concerns regarding the children’s medical care and parenting-time exchanges.
Read More
#
Posted: Oct 6, 2021, 9:55 AM
The trial court properly modified the original custody order in this case to award the plaintiff-mother sole physical custody of the parties’ minor children, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.
Read More
#
Posted: Aug 25, 2021, 11:15 AM
A trial court erred by granting a father sole legal custody of the parties’ minor children, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled, because the evidence showed the parties were able to cooperate and make important decisions about the children.
Read More
#
Posted: Mar 24, 2021, 9:55 AM
A trial court is not prohibited by the court rules from giving interim effect to a referee’s recommended order that changes custody pending a judicial hearing on an objection to the recommendation, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.
Read More
#
Posted: Feb 10, 2021, 9:35 AM
The father in this case was erroneously granted joint physical and legal custody of the parties’ children, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled, because the trial court improperly conflated his motion to change custody with the mother’s motion to change domicile, effectively placing the burden of proof on the mother for both motions.
Read More
#
Posted: Feb 3, 2021, 10:10 AM
A mother’s motion for modification of custody was erroneously denied, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled, because the trial court failed to conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine whether she had established the required proper cause or change in circumstances.
Read More
#
Posted: Jan 27, 2021, 10:20 AM
The trial court correctly modified the parties’ custody order to give the mother sole legal and physical custody of the children, according to the Michigan Court of Appeals, because the father’s use of corporal punishment as a method of discipline constituted domestic violence.
Read More
#
Posted: Sep 23, 2020, 10:25 AM
A mother’s request to change the school of the parties’ minor child was wrongly denied because the trial judge 1) did not interview the child about his school preference and 2) failed to consider several of the best-interest factors in MCL 722.23, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.
Read More
#
Posted: Jul 22, 2020, 11:00 AM
Even though the trial court did not conduct an interview with the parties’ children regarding their custody preferences, the decision to grant the plaintiff-mother sole legal custody was appropriate, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.
Read More
#
Posted: Jul 15, 2020, 9:45 AM
The trial court’s decision regarding the minor child’s schooling was appropriate because the court did not abuse its discretion in changing the child’s established custodial environment after evaluating the statutory best interest factors, according to the Michigan Court of Appeals.
Read More
#
Posted: Jun 10, 2020, 9:35 AM
A trial court erroneously treated a father’s motion to designate a school for his child as a motion for change of physical custody, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.
Read More
#
Posted: May 6, 2020, 12:45 PM
The trial court in this custody action erroneously discounted the role of the parent who worked outside the home and, as a result, improperly ruled that the child only had an established custodial environment with the stay-at-home parent, the Michigan Court of Appeals has decided.
Read More
#
Posted: Mar 25, 2020, 10:05 AM
On appeal, the defendant claimed the trial court’s decision regarding proper cause or change in circumstances was erroneous. Among other things, he challenged the timeliness of the evidence considered by the trial court
Read More
#
Posted: Mar 18, 2020, 9:15 AM
The plaintiff-mother and the defendant-father were married in 2013. They child was born in 2015. A judgment of divorce was entered by the Oakland County Circuit Court in April 2016. The divorce judgment provided that the parties shared joint legal custody of the child and the plaintiff had primary physical custody.
Read More
#
Posted: Mar 11, 2020, 1:15 PM
The plaintiff and the defendant are the parents of twins. The parties were never married or in a romantic relationship. The parties shared legal custody and the defendant had physical custody of the children. The parties were able to effectively co-parent throughout much of the children’s adolescence.
Read More
#
Posted: Jan 22, 2020, 10:50 AM
In Demski (Docket No. 322193), the defendant mother gave birth to the child, MP, shortly after she married another man, Jeffrey Petlick, who was the child’s presumed father under Michigan law. After paternity testing determined that MP was the plaintiff’s biological daughter, the plaintiff filed a custody and parenting time action in the Berrien County Circuit Court.
Read More
#
Posted: Nov 13, 2019, 2:30 PM
Child custody cases regularly require the filing of an emergency motion – which is what happened in Brenner v Kerkstra (Docket No. 346078). In Brenner, the appeal by right deadline had been missed, leaving an application for leave to appeal as the only option for appellate review.
Read More
#
Posted: Nov 6, 2019, 11:35 AM
In Palmer, the plaintiff and the defendant were never married and had one child together, AP. The Gratiot County Circuit Court had previously granted the plaintiff sole legal and physical custody of AP; had granted the defendant reasonable supervised parenting time with no overnights; and had permitted the plaintiff to move with AP to North Dakota, where he had secured a higher-paying job.
Read More

Subscribe to our blog

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

Archived
Posts

Tags