Blog

Browse Our Blog for Knowledge on How to Protect Yourself Legally and to See Examples of How We've Achieved Results


The court held that the circuit court improperly awarded sole custody of the parties' child to the father absent a best-interest analysis, and should have continued the child protective proceedings as the mother pleaded to jurisdictional grounds.

As the mother's case proceeded, the circuit court placed the child in the father's custody, and instead of continuing the matter so respondent could engage in services and work toward reunification, it completely dismissed the child protective...

Agreeing with defendant-Allstate that the trial court erred in granting plaintiff-Ruben's motion for relief from the final judgment's no-appeal provision, the court vacated the portion of the order granting Ruben relief, and remanded.

Intervening plaintiff-Badgett was entitled to no-fault benefits from Allstate. After a "jury trial involving a dispute over Ruben's charges to Allstate for medical services and products provided to Badgett, the parties entered into a final judgment...

After remand, in which the court instructed the trial court to reevaluate its best-interests determination in light of the children's placement with a relative, the court held that the trial court complied with its remand instructions, and affirmed.

On appeal, the respondent offered two claims of error as to the trial court's decision to terminate respondent's parental rights to CC and AC. First, respondent argued that the trial court clearly erred by finding that termination was appropriate...

Holding that the jury's decision to award the plaintiff no noneconomic damages was grossly inadequate and against the great weight of the evidence, the court reversed the trial court's order denying her noneconomic damages and remanded for a new tria

Plaintiff was seriously injured when she and the defendant collided while skiing. The jury declined to award either economic or noneconomic damages, even though it found defendant 50% negligent. The trial court found that the verdict as to economic...

Holding that the trial court committed clear legal error by failing to make findings as to several disputed issues, the court vacated the trial court's PT modification and remanded the case for reconsideration of the contested best-interest and PT fa

Plaintiff-mother appealed a final order closing the case in this child support and parenting time dispute. However, her issues on appeal related to the trial court's prior order granting the defendant-father out-of-state parenting time. Plaintiff...

Holding that a custody agreement existed between the plaintiff-father and the defendant-mother, but that the trial court failed to adequately consider the child's best interests before it entered the custody judgment, the court vacated and remanded.

The parties had a child together, but never married. They entered into a mediated parenting time and custody agreement. Defendant later objected to the agreement and requested a best interests hearing, which the trial court denied. On appeal, the...

The court rejected the plaintiff-ex-husband's challenges to the trial court's property division and orders relating to insurance policies, but agreed that remand was required as to the award of attorney fees and costs to the defendant-ex-wife.

Thus, it vacated the order awarding attorney fees and remanded for further proceedings on this issue, but otherwise affirmed. As to the application of the Sparks factors, while "defendant received significantly more property than plaintiff" under...

After remand to the trial court for further proceedings, the court held that the trial court did not clearly err in finding that terminating the respondent-mother's parental rights was in the best interests of her five children.

On remand, the trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing and "provided a clear ruling explaining why it found termination" was in the children's best interests. It considered the appropriate factors and found that respondent "was not compliant...

The court held that the trial court properly terminated the respondent-father's parental rights to the three children where the statutory grounds were established by clear and convincing evidence and termination was in their best interests.

Given the length of the case and his "noncompliance, lack of accountability, and his substance abuse issues-including multiple relapses when he was close to reunification- there was not a reasonable expectation that he would be able to provide...

Holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying defendant-Norman's (father) motion to change custody and allowing plaintiff-Curtis (mother) to retain primary physical custody of the parties' minor daughter (S), the court affirmed

Norman argued that the trial court's finding of an ECE with Curtis was against the great weight of the evidence, meaning that the trial court erred by applying a clear and convincing standard as opposed to a preponderance of the evidence standard....

The court held that the probate court did not clearly err in ruling that the decedent's bank accounts did not have rights of survivorship and in ordering the appellants to disgorge funds they withdrew from his bank accounts shortly after his death.

The decedent maintained checking and savings accounts. Shortly before his death, while he was hospitalized and unable to communicate, appellant-Claudette Greenhoe deposited an inheritance check that the decedent received in his savings account. The...

Concluding that Marin properly interpreted a former version of § 19b(1) as not requiring the child be in foster care for a termination petition to be considered, the court rejected father's request to declare a "but for" conflict under MCR 7.215(J)(2

Before the child was born, respondent (at the age of 18) pleaded guilty to CSC I. The victim was his nine-year-old cousin. Petitioner testified that she learned the facts of respondent's conviction after she gave birth to the child, and broke off...

In an issue of first impression in a published opinion, the court held that a defendant's consent to search her home was not an "incriminating statement" under the Fifth Amendment because it was "not testimonial or communicative evidence."

After being arrested during a traffic stop, defendant-Calvetti signed her Miranda warnings, acknowledging that she knew her rights and indicating that she "did not want to answer questions." She argued that the DEA agent's continued questioning...

The court held that the trial court did not err by setting off receiver fees and support arrearages owed by the ex-husband to the ex-wife from plaintiff's obligation to pay defendant 50% of the equity in the marital home.

In the divorce judgment, plaintiff was awarded the home, and defendant was awarded a 50% equity interest in the home. The judgment also covered the parties' various other obligations. Shortly before the divorce, defendant entered into a written fee...

The trial court did not err by finding that the defendant was not entitled to claim immunity under § 4 of the MMMA where the marijuana "cuttings" he placed in "grow material" had developed to the point of becoming "plants" under the statute.

It also held that the trial court did not err in refusing to suppress the evidence merely because the affidavit did not establish that defendant was not entitled to the immunity defense. He was convicted of possession with intent to deliver...

The trial court's determination that the defendant-father failed to show proper cause was not against the great weight of the evidence. Also, his argument that he was entitled to another evidentiary hearing was without merit.

Defendant argued that the trial court erred when it made its threshold determination that proper cause or a Change Of Circumstance did not exist to warrant revisiting the issue of custody. The last custody order was entered on 10/8/14 by consent of...

The court held that the plaintiff-mother failed to establish grounds to change the child's domicile pursuant to MCL 722.31(4). However, the court vacated the award of attorney fees and remanded for further proceedings as to calculation of the fees.

The court held that the plaintiff-mother failed to establish grounds to change the child's domicile pursuant to MCL 722.31(4). Thus, the trial court did not have to reach her motion to take primary physical custody or analyze the statutory best...

The court held the trial court did not err by allocating assets to the defendant-ex-husband without including their value in the marital estate. The court could not determine whether the estate was equitably divided without findings on the Sparks fac

The court held that the trial court did not err by allocating two assets to the defendant-ex-husband without including their value in the marital estate. However, it noted that based on the trial court's failure to make findings on the Sparks...

Concluding that there was no evidence to support that the property at issue was the petitioner's principal residence in 2014, the court affirmed the Tax Tribunal's order affirming the respondent's denial of a Principal Residence Exemption.

The Talamore for Three Trust became an owner of the property in 1/14. Petitioner was the trustee of the Trust and co-owner of the property. His 2/14 documents only showed that he rented a trailer that was delivered to Muskegon. His 4/14 receipts...

Don't let a bad decision, unfair contract, or a messy divorce get in the way of a promising future!
Contact the experienced team at Aldrich Legal Services today to schedule your free initial
consultation
and secure reliable and trustworthy representation today!
Get the Help You Need From a Team You Can Truly Count On: (734) 404-3000
734-237-6482