Now Accepting New Clients!

Court gives little weight to children's preferences in determining custody

The trial court did not err in refusing to interview the children as to their preferences. Also, the defendant-father failed to show that the trial court's findings were against the great weight of the evidence, or that it erred in denying his motion to modify custody. Finally, the trial court did not clearly err in determining that sanctions were not appropriate. Pursuant to the parties' 2007 judgment of divorce, they share legal custody of their four children. The plaintiff-mother retained primary physical custody of them, and defendant had parenting time on alternate weekends and for four nonconsecutive weeks during the summer. In 2014, defendant filed a verified motion to modify custody of the triplets. He appealed the trial court's order denying his verified motion to modify custody, arguing that the trial court erred by refusing to interview them as to their preferences. However, the trial court was permitted to accept his allegation as to the children's preferences as true, but because preferences are only one factor relevant under MCL 722.23, the trial court was not required to give their preferences great weight. Moreover, a change in a child's preference as to the custodial parent "will rarely justify revisiting a custody determination." Affirmed

Antenuptial agreement held to be valid and enforceable

The court held that the parties' antenuptial agreement was valid and enforceable, concluding that to invalidate it on the basis of one party's fault would contravene the agreement's clear and unambiguous language, and that as a matter of law, the...

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
and secure reliable and trustworthy representation today!
Get the Help You Need From a Team You Can Truly Count On: (734) 404-3000