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

Speaker Law
Blog

#
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
#
Posted: Oct 23, 2019, 10:40 AM
The parties were divorced and had two children, AAM and MCM, during their marriage. The divorce judgment, entered by the Ionia County Circuit Court, awarded joint legal custody of the children to both parties and primary physical custody to the plaintiff. The defendant, who served in the military, accepted a job in Virginia in 2013. He returned to Michigan in 2016 and filed a motion for parenting time, which the trial court granted.
Read More
#
Posted: Oct 16, 2019, 11:15 AM
In Slocum v Floyd, the defendant was divorced from the plaintiffs’ son. After the divorce, the plaintiffs’ son had primary physical custody of the children and both parents shared legal custody. The plaintiffs’ son later remarried but died in a motorcycle accident. After their son’s death, the plaintiffs filed emergency petitions seeking a temporary guardianship over the children.
Read More
#
Posted: Oct 9, 2019, 10:55 AM
In Luna v Regnier, the Tuscola County Circuit Court completely suspended the mother’s parenting time with her children, finding there was clear and convincing evidence the children’s mental and emotional health was endangered by allowing her to visit with them.
Read More
#
Posted: Apr 24, 2019, 3:55 PM
In this custody/change of domicile appeal, the trial court committed “clear legal error” by considering whether the children’s mother would be able to maintain her existing parenting-time schedule if the children moved with their father to Indiana, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.
Read More
#
Posted: Aug 1, 2018, 9:15 AM
The Michigan Court of Appeals has vacated an order denying a divorced father’s request to change the school his children attend, finding the trial court failed to 1) address the children’s established custodial environment, 2) describe the applicable burden of proof and 3) consider the Child Custody Act’s best-interest factors. In Marik v Marik (Docket No. 333687), the Court of Appeals remanded the case so the trial court could properly handle these issues.
Read More
#
Posted: Mar 5, 2018, 2:15 PM
A trial court erroneously used a “preponderance of the evidence” standard to determine it was in the child’s best interest to change the established custodial arrangement, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled in a 2-1 decision that may create more confusion as to how to apply the burden in custody cases.
Read More

Subscribe to our blog

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

Archived
Posts

Tags