phone icon email icon
(517) 482-8933

Speaker Law
Blog

#
Posted: Aug 28, 2019, 11:05 AM
In In re AMR (Docket No. 344560), the petitioner-mother and the respondent-father were never married and had one child, AMR, together in 2013. When the petitioner married Adam Dizotell in 2017, she filed a petition to terminate the respondent’s parental rights so that Dizotell could adopt AMR.
Read More
#
Posted: Aug 21, 2019, 9:30 AM
In In re AGD, Minor (Docket No. 345717), the petitioner-mother and the respondent-father were never married and in 2015 had one child together, AGD. The respondent established paternity by affidavit of parentage.
Read More
#
Posted: Aug 14, 2019, 10:50 AM
In In re RC, Minor (Docket No. 343736), the biological parents’ rights had been terminated and the child, RC, was committed to the Michigan Children’s Institute (MCI) for adoption planning. RC was placed in the care of the petitioner, Lucinda Carrier, who had obtained a foster care license and was the child’s paternal aunt. Thereafter, the petitioner sought to legally adopt RC.
Read More
#
Posted: Jul 19, 2019, 9:15 AM
The case arose when the Department of Health and Human Services petitioned the Otsego Circuit Court, Family Division, to remove minor JF from her parents. The Department alleged that JF’s parents had failed to adequately attend to JF’s medical needs by missing several of her medical appointments; not refilling her prescription medications; and failing to provide adequate living conditions for JF.
Read More
#
Posted: May 29, 2018, 10:30 AM
In a case where the respondent-mother’s parental rights had been terminated, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that her appeal was not moot, even though the child died while the appeal was pending. The reason? Because the respondent-mother faced “collateral legal consequences” as a result of the parental rights termination.
Read More
#
Posted: May 11, 2018, 1:00 PM
Although there was no parenting-time order in place when a grandmother was named the legal guardian of her three grandchildren, the trial court must consider the biological father’s request for a parenting-time plan, in order to protect his parental rights and promote a relationship with him, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.
Read More
#
Posted: Feb 23, 2018, 11:30 AM
In this termination case, In re Jones, Minors, No. 336271, the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) appealed the Oakland County Circuit Court’s order dismissing the petition to adjudicate and terminate the parental rights of the respondent-mother to her three minor children.
Read More
#
Posted: Dec 28, 2017, 11:30 AM
In the matter of In re B. Hadd, Minor, No: 337095, 337097, the termination of parental rights of both parents by the lower court was upheld by the Michigan Court of Appeals (MCOA). The application of the MCOA order is being held in abeyance pursuant to the order of the Michigan Supreme Court, SC: 156604 because the Court believes the decision in the case of In re Hill, Minors (No.155152) presently before it may resolve a similar issue raised in the Hadd application for leave to appeal.
Read More
#
Posted: Nov 16, 2017, 10:00 AM
For the second time and on identical issues, the matter of In re Jones, Minors, No. 336836, came before the Michigan Court of Appeals (MCOA) on the father’s appeal of a circuit court order terminating his parental rights. The MCOA again reversed and remanded for further proceedings, this time before a different jurist.
Read More
#
Posted: Mar 20, 2017, 9:25 AM
The Michigan Court of Appeals reversed the lower court decision terminating the father’s rights to his child because of the termination of his rights to two children in the past (MCL 712.19b (3)(l)—termination where parent’s rights to another child have been terminated.)
Read More
#
Posted: Dec 2, 2016, 11:00 AM
In In re GRD (Docket No. 333131), the Court of Appeals addressed whether the rule of In re Mason, 486 Mich 142; 782 NW2d 747 (2010)—that a parent’s rights may not be terminated solely on the basis of parental incarceration in a Juvenile Code case—also applied to an Adoption Code case.
Read More
#
Posted: Nov 21, 2016, 1:30 PM
The Court of Appeals recently reversed a trial court’s decision terminating parental rights based on the lack of jurisdiction and inadmissible evidence during the child protective proceedings. In Re Jones, unpublished per curiam, issued November 8, 2016 (Docket 332616).
Read More
#
Posted: Nov 10, 2016, 12:10 PM
While parenting time between the preliminary hearing and adjudication and after the termination petition is filed are controlled by court rules (MCR 3.965(C)(7)(a); MCR 3.977(D) ) and statutes (MCL 712A.13a(13) ; MCL712A.19b(4)), visitation after adjudication is controlled by the court.
Read More
#
Posted: Sep 27, 2016, 1:25 PM
In this case (In re Trumble, No 330627) Respondent Mother appealed the Gladwin Circuit Court order terminating her parental rights to her child arguing that the trial court violated her due process by its failure to sua sponte or on its own appoint an attorney to represent her. The Court of Appeals, affirmed the trial court order, stating that because the respondent knowingly declined the offer of appointed counsel at the preliminary hearing and had never shown she suffered from an obvious cognitive impairment, she failed to show that the trial court denied her due process by declining to sua sponte appoint counsel.
Read More
#
Posted: Jul 8, 2016, 9:20 AM
The MI Court of Appeals (COA) held the Ingham County trial court’s termination of a father’s rights was clearly erroneous where the rights were terminated because (1) the conditions that led to the adjudication continued to exist, (2) the father failed to provide proper care and custody and (3) there was a reasonable likelihood of harm if the situation continued.
Read More
#
Posted: Apr 11, 2016, 1:05 PM
The Michigan Supreme Court has directed that, when finalizing adoptions, trial courts must use specific language on the record, indicating that no appeal is pending in the underlying termination of parental rights case.
Read More
#
Posted: Mar 28, 2016, 9:25 AM
Following the most recent blog (In re Jones, blog dated March 21, 2016) about the Supreme Court’s continued interest in the Hatcher rule,the Michigan Court of Appeals has vacated an order terminating a father’s parental rights because the trial court effectively deprived him of an adjudication trial and, as a result, his due process rights were violated.
Read More
#
Posted: Mar 21, 2016, 10:25 AM
The Michigan Supreme Court has peremptorily vacated the termination of a mother’s parental rights, as well as the Michigan Court of Appeals decision upholding that termination.
Read More
#
Posted: Mar 4, 2016, 2:15 PM
The Michigan Supreme Court recently refused to hear the appeal in In re Maes (Docket No. 152973). The denial of leave in Maes means that significant flaws in appellate case precedent have now been left intact, impacting hundreds of parental rights proceedings.
Read More
#
Posted: Feb 17, 2016, 3:25 PM
In a case upon which the Supreme Court granted leave and scheduled argument to occur in May 2016, today the Supreme Court vacated the order adjudicating jurisdiction over the children and vacated the order terminating parental rights.
Read More

Subscribe to our blog

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

Archived
Posts

Tags