FLINT CHILD CUSTODY ATTORNEY ON MODIFICATION 235-1970


Modification of MICHIGAN CHILD Custody Orders or Judgments

THE COURT WANTS STABILITY IN A CHILDS LIFE BY MAKING IT DIFFICULT TO CHANGE CHILD CUSTODY. The Child Custody Act authorizes a trial court to modify child custody orders “for proper cause shown or because of change of circumstances,” and if in the child’s best interests. MCL 722.27(1)(c). CALL FLINT DIVORCE ATTORNEY TERRY BANKERT 235-1970 IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS

PRIOR ORDERS CAN OLY BE ALTERED BY SHOWING A CHANGE IN CIRCUMSTANCES.While the parties may stipulate to a temporary custody arrangement during the pendency of a divorce and the court may enter a temporary order pursuant to that stipulation, the resulting order is not a “previous” judgment or order for the purposes of MCL 722.27(1)(c). Under the statute, no previous judgment or order may be modified unless there is a showing of proper cause or a change of circumstances. FLINT DIVORCE LAWYER TERRY BANKERT 235-1970 IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS http://attorneybankert.com/

CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE IS THE TEST.However, where no evidentiary hearing setting custody is held but the parties’ stipulation is the sole basis for a temporary order, that order is not a “previous” judgment or order and therefore, no change of circumstances need be shown for the order to be modified. To have the custody arrangement modified, the movant must present clear and convincing evidence that the modification is in the best interests of the child. Thompson v Thompson, 261 Mich App 353, 683 NW2d 250 (2004). QUESTIONS ANSWERED AT 235-1970 FLINT DIVORCE ATTORNEY TERRY BANKERT. http://terrybankert.blogspot.com/

A HEARING MUST BE HELD.There is ample caselaw holding that a trial court cannot order a change of custody without first holding a hearing. See generally Dick v Dick, 210 Mich App 576, 587, 534 NW2d 185 (1995); Mann v Mann, 190 Mich App 526, 532–533, 476 NW2d 439 (1991); Schlender v Schlender, 235 Mich App 230, 233, 596 NW2d 643 (1999). DIVORCE ATTORNEY TERRY BANKERT 235-1970 BASED IN FLINT. CALL IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS
http://dumpmycreditors.wordpress.com/

However, in 2001, the supreme court amended MCR 3.210 to include a new subsection that provides: “In deciding whether an evidentiary hearing is necessary with regard to a postjudgment motion to change custody, the court must determine, by requiring an offer of proof or otherwise, whether there are contested factual issues that must be resolved in order for the court to make an informed decision on the motion.” MCR 3.210(C)(8). QUESTIONS?CALL FLINT DIVORCE ATTORNEY TERRY BANKERT 235-1970. https://occupyflintlegal.wordpress.com/

WHEN PARENTS DISAGREE THE COURT MUST HOLD A HEARING
A request for an evidentiary hearing should be granted when factual questions are contested. Bielawski v Bielawski, 137 Mich App 587, 358 NW2d 383 (1984) (no abuse of discretion in denying evidentiary hearing on motion for change of domicile where nonmoving party did not contest issues material to decision); see also Schlender v Schlender, 235 Mich App 230, 596 NW2d 643 (1999) (local court rule that conditioned right to custody hearing on offer of proof of anticipated evidence improperly restricted parties’ right to evidentiary hearing on motion for change of custody).
THE COURT NEEDS MORE INFORMATION THAN A FRIEND OF THE COURT REPORT
The court may not change custody solely on the basis of a Friend of the Court recommendation. Mann v Mann, 190 Mich App 526, 476 NW2d 439 (1991). It was error for the trial court to enter a stipulated order to change custody without making any independent determination regarding the best interests of the child. Phillips v Jordan, 241 Mich App 17, 614 NW2d 183 (2000).
100 MILE RULE
The evidentiary hearing held to determine if a change in a child’s domicile is warranted under the 100-mile rule of MCL 722.31 is not sufficient to also determine a change of custody request under MCL 722.23. The trial court is obligated to hold a separate hearing on a change of custody request. Grew v Knox, 265 Mich App 333, 694 NW2d 772 (2005). An evidentiary hearing is mandated before custody can be modified, even on a temporary basis. Id.
ACTIVE MILITARY IS PROTECTED

If a motion for change of custody is filed during the time a parent is in active military duty, the court may not enter an order modifying or amending a previous judgment or order, or issue a new order, that changes the child’s placement existing on the date the parent was called to active military duty. The court may, however, enter a temporary custody order if there is clear and convincing evidence that it is in the best interests of the child. On a parent’s return from active military duty, the court must reinstate the custody order in effect immediately preceding that period of active military duty. If a motion for change of custody is filed after a parent returns from active military duty, the court may not consider the parent’s absence due to military duty in a best interests of the child determination. MCL 722.27(1)(c), as amended by2005 PA 328.

FOR A FREE MEETING WITH AN ATTORNEY TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS ON CHANGING THE CUSTODY OF A CHILD IN MICHIGAN CALL 235-1950
[]
Primary Source
Michigan Family Law Benchbook ch 3 (ICLE 2d ed 2006), at

http://www.icle.org/modules/books/chapter.aspx/?lib=family&book=2006553550&chapter=03

(last updated 12/16/2011)

Tags: , , , , , ,

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: