734-359-7018
Now Accepting New Clients!
Blog

FAMILY LAW 82: Court stated it would terminate the personal protection order (PPO) after the parties present documentation of the initiation of the divorce proceedings.

On January 19, 2021, petitioner filed a petition for a PPO against respondent, who was her husband and with whom she shared children, alleging that she feared for her safety because of respondent’s threatening and violent behavior. On the same day, the trial court entered an order prohibiting respondent from having contact with petitioner in the manner petitioner requested. The order provided that it would remain in effect until January 18, 2022.

Motion to Terminate PPO

In response, respondent filed a motion to terminate or modify the PPO. The trial court held a hearing at which respondent presented evidence to refute petitioner’s claims. After taking testimony, the trial court summarized that petitioner no longer wanted to have a relationship with respondent and that respondent has not favorably reacted to that, basically, engaging in conduct that can only be described as stalking.

Trial Court

The trial court observed that respondent tended to attempt to exercise control over matters outside of his legitimate control, which the trial court found was concerning in terms of his willingness to allow things like a court order to be honored. However, the trial court concluded that these matters should, in fact, be in the province and the jurisdiction of the Family Division and in that respect, having issued a personal protection order, the Court stated it would terminate the personal protection order after the parties present documentation of the initiation of the divorce proceedings.

 On March 23, 2021, after divorce proceedings had been initiated, the trial court granted respondent’s motion to terminate the PPO.

Experienced Family Law Attorney

At Aldrich Legal Services, our attorneys and staff understand the stress that can come with family law disputes. If you need a personal protection order (PPO) please contact our office.

Contact Aldrich Legal Services

Speak to a Pro: (734) 404-3000

FAMILY LAW 88: The trial court found that the children did not have an established custodial environment with defendant because, before the separation, he did not have a large role in the children’s lives.

The trial court credited plaintiff’s testimony that, before the parties’ separation, defendant spent minimal time helping to care for the children, so its finding that the children would not have looked to defendant for guidance, discipline, the necessities of life, and parental comfort during that time was not against the great weight of the evidence.

REAL ESTATE 89: RM had not included any language in the deed providing that the property was a joint tenancy with full rights of survivorship, the property instead became a tenancy in common.

RM drafted the deed without seeking counsel and mistakenly believed that, if either she or FK died, the property would fully pass to the surviving tenant. FK’s will provided that if his wife predeceased him—which she did—the personal representative of his estate should sell any residual property that he owned and divide the cash proceeds equally among his surviving children.

FAMILY LAW 83: A trial court can terminate a parent’s rights and permit a stepparent to adopt a child.

A trial court has discretion to terminate a parent’s rights and permit a stepparent to adopt a child when the conditions of MCL 710.51(6) are met. MCL 710.51(6)(b) requires the petitioner to establish that the other parent had the ability to visit, contact, or communicate with the children, and substantially failed or neglected to do so for a period of two years.

PROBATE 53: The trust agreement included an Incontestability Provision.

A settlor’s intent is to be carried out as nearly as possible. Generally, in terrorem clauses are valid and enforceable. However, a provision in a trust that purports to penalize an interested person for contesting the trust or instituting another proceeding relating to the trust shall not be given effect if probable cause exists for instituting a proceeding contesting the trust or another proceeding relating to the trust.

What to Do When Homeowners Insurance Denies Your Claim

Since 1955, homeowners insurance has helped owners protect their property and belongings against damages and theft. According to the Insurance Information Institute, over 93% of homeowners in the US have homeowners insurance coverage, paying around...

What to Look for in a Criminal Defense Attorney

Originally posted on 10/20/2017 If you are charged with a crime, you could face severe penalties that could include financial fines, public service, or even jail time. For those in the Michigan area, hiring an attorney experienced in...

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
734-366-4405