Blog

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


Posts in the Custody category:

FAMILY LAW 32: Trial court committed error in failing to address whether there was an established custodial environment.

On appeal, plaintiff argues that the trial court failed to make any findings regarding (1) the child’s established custodial environment, (2) the child’s best interests regarding the grant of primary physical custody to defendant, (3) the child’s best interests with respect to parenting time, and (4) the child’s best interests pertaining to the parties’ dispute over daycare.

FAMILY LAW 24: Plaintiff-mother denied her motion to change parenting time.

The Child Custody Act of 1970, MCL 722.21 authorizes a trial court to issue custody and parenting-time orders that are in the child’s best interests. A showing of proper cause or change of circumstances is required to modify a parenting-time order. The movant has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that either proper cause or a change of circumstances exists.

Court affirmed termination of father's parental rights.

Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed that termination of father's parental rights was in the child' best interests.The caseworker testified that the father never met the child because he was continually incarcerated during the child's entire life....

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...

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...

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 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 defendant failed to establish a change in circumstances to alter the child's established custodial environment or that the move was in the child's best interests, so the Court affirmed the trial court's denying his motion for sole custody.

First, he incorrectly argued that he was not required to present evidence as to PC or a CIC because the trial court's initial custody decision was based on an agreement between the parties. "A negotiated settlement agreement 'does not diminish the...

Given the trial court's reliance on record evidence supporting its findings under the best-interest factors of MCL 722.23, the Court of Appeals found no abuse of the trial court's discretion in granting physical custody to defendant-Govitz (father).

Although Kayko worked fewer hours and had more opportunity to tend to KKG "on a daily basis, this did not negate that Govitz equally loved his son and could care for him." Accordingly, the evidence did not preponderate against the trial court's...
Page: 123 - All

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