2001 Domestic Relations Case Review - Menu

To Search This Site By Key Word
Domestic Relations Review

Return to Calhoun County Courts Home Page

December

November

THERE IS A FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL PRESUMPTION THAT PARENTAL CUSTODY SERVES THE CHILD’S BEST INTERESTS
     Geer v Alexander, 2001 WL 1403473 (Mich.App.) (Court of Appeals # 231430, November 9, 2001)
RELATIVE WHO WAS PROPERLY GIVEN PHYSICAL CUSTODY WAS ENTITLED TO THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF STATUS, AND PARENT WAS REQUIRED TO DEMONSTRATE CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES TO WARRANT EVIDENTIARY HEARING ON CHANGE OF CUSTODY
     Kontor v. Dunn UNPUBLISHED (Court Of Appeals No. 231172, November 9, 2001)

October

DISCLOSURE OF MINOR'S MENTAL HEALTH RECORDS TO NON CUSTODIAL PARENT NOT REQUIRED BY CHILD CUSTODY ACT
     Attorney General's Opinion 7092, October 16, 2001

September

SIXTH CIRCUIT FINDS FEDERAL CHILD SUPPORT RECOVERY ACT  A VALID EXERCISE OF CONGRESS’S POWER UNDER THE COMMERCE CLAUSE
     United States v. Faasse, ELECTRONIC CITATION:  2001 FED App. 0324P (6th Cir.) (File Name:  01a0324p.06) (September 14, 2001)
IN CAMERA INTERVIEWS IN CHILD CUSTODY CASES MUST BE LIMITED TO REASONABLE INQUIRY OF PARENTAL PREFERENCE.  ALL FUTURE IN CAMERA INTERVIEWS MUST BE RECORDED AND SEALED FOR APPELLATE REVIEW.  RECORD OF THE INTERVIEWS MUST BE AVAILABLE TO THE PARTIES IF THE INTERVIEW AFFECTS AN ADDITIONAL FACTOR AND MAKES A DIFFERENCE IN OUTCOME OF CASE
     Molloy v. Molloy, ____Mich App____(2001) (Court of Appeals No. 224179, September 4, 2001)

August

Top of Page

July

PARENT’S CHILD SUPPORT OBLIGATION MUST BE TERMINATED WHILE PARENT IS INCARCERATED UNLESS IT IS AFFIRMATIVELY SHOWN THAT THE PARENT HAS INCOME OR ASSETS FOR PAYMENT
     Carruth v. Carruth, UNPUBLISHED (Court of Appeals No. 223753, July 27, 2001)
FINDINGS USED TO CHANGE CUSTODY MUST BE SUPPORTED ON THE RECORD AND MAY NOT RELY SOLELY ON IN CAMERA INTERVIEW THAT CANNOT BE REVIEWED ON APPEAL
     Foskett v. Foskett,  ____ Mich App____ (2001) (Court of Appeals No. 230222, July 24, 2001)
FAMILY COURT WAS NOT REQUIRED TO HOLD EVIDENTIARY HEARING ON CHANGE OF CUSTODY WHERE MOVING PARTY’S DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE DID NOT ESTABLISH PROPER CAUSE OR CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES
     Boehnlein v. Boehnlein, UNPUBLISHED (Court of Appeals No. 231000, July 6, 2001)

June

FAMILY COURT COULD NOT TRANSFER TEMPORARY CUSTODY IN DIVORCE CASE WITHOUT HEARING DESPITE PROTECTIVE SERVICES REPORT
     Spranger v Spranger UNPUBLISHED (Court of Appeals No. 231265, June 29, 2001)
TRIAL COURT SHOULD HAVE APPLIED THE CHANGE IN CUSTODY STANDARD WHERE PETITION TO MODIFY PARENTING TIME EFFECTIVELY REQUESTED A CHANGE IN CUSTODIAL ENVIRONMENT
     Winokur v Winokur UNPUBLISHED (Court of Appeals Nos. 225939 & 226008, June 22, 2001)
Top of Page

May

FATHER WHO ACKNOWLEDGED PATERNITY DID NOT ACQUIRE THE SAME RIGHTS AS FATHER OF CHILD BORN IN WEDLOCK
     Eldred v. Ziny, ____Mich App____(2001) (Court of Appeals No. 229230, May 22, 2001)
PROFIT SHARING, RECOGNITION AWARDS AND SIGNING BONUSES ARE ALL “EARNINGS” SUBJECT TO LIMITATION OF AMOUNT THAT CAN BE WITHHELD UNDER CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT ACT
     Genesee County Friend of the Court v General Motors Corporation, ____Mich ____(2001) (Supreme Court Nos: 115856 & 115862, May 15, 2001)
CIRCUIT COURT COULD NOT ALTER PARENTING TIME DECISION MADE IN BINDING MEDIATION ABSENT CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES
     Graham v Graham, UNPUBLISHED (Court of Appeals No. 222457, May 15, 2001)

April

CIRCUIT COURT COULD NOT REDUCE CHILD SUPPORT TO OFFSET DEBT OWED TO NONCUSTODIAL PARENT
     Wallin v Wallin, UNPUBLISHED (Court of Appeals No. 222036, April 24, 2001)
TRIAL COURT’S REASONS FOR IMPUTING INCOME MUST BE STATED ON THE RECORD
     FIA and Cox v Krist UNPUBLISHED (Court of Appeals No. 217733, April 17, 2001)

March

PARENTS vs GRANDPARENTS
     Zulkowski v Zulkowski S.C.: #117145; COA #225791; L.C. #92-003679-DM

February

SUPREME COURT GRANTS LEAVE TO APPEAL AND STAYS PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT IN COUNTY CLERK CASE
     Lapeer County Clerk v. Lapeer Circuit Judges  UPDATE (Supreme Court No. 118102)

January

FRIEND OF THE COURT REFEREE AND TRIAL JUDGE MUST MAKE ALL FINDINGS REQUIRED BEFORE IMPUTING INCOME FOR CHILD SUPPORT
     Bhagat v. Bhagat UNPUBLISHED (Court of Appeals No. 218352, January 16, 2001)
Top of Page

Domestic Relations Review

Return to Calhoun County Courts Home Page


Last updated 2-28-02

Send your comments, questions and suggestions to Phil Harter at 161 E Michigan Avenue, Battle Creek, Michigan 49014
or e mail to pharter@calhouncountymi.gov