by Wendy Alton
As if we didn’t hear enough about celebrity family issues recently. Kelsey Grammer has filed legal papers in court seeking sole physical custody of his two children: 9 year old daughter Mason, and 6 year old son Jade. The kids actually live in L.A. with their mother, Camille Grammer, while Kelsey lives in Chicago with his new wife, Kayte Walsh. In the divorce, Camille Grammer was granted physical custody of the children, but Kelsey Grammer apparently wants to change that and move them to Chicago: Kelsey Grammer Trying to Rip Custody from Camille.
What does it take to win a custody battle, and move two children from their home in LA to Chicago? In Michigan, this is no small feat. First, the Court must determine that there has actually been a change in circumstances or that there is good cause in order to change a custody arrangement. If the Court determines that there has been a change in circumstances or good cause, then the Court must determine that the proposed custody arrangement is in the best interests of the children. This means that the Court must listen testimony and review evidence surrounding 12 best interest factors, listed in MCL 722.23. In the case where the proposed custody change would essentially transfer the children physically from one parent to the other, the Court must find that the proposed change is in the best interests of the children by “clear and convincing evidence.”
Additionally, in Michigan, if you not only want to change custody, but then want to move the children out of state, the Court must consider other issues. In what is called the D’Onofrio test, the Court must find that the relocation is in the best interest of the children by a preponderance of the evidence after consideration of the following factors:
1. Will the change improve the quality of life for the child and parent
2. The degree to which each parent has complied with their parenting time schedule
3. The degree to which the court can modify parenting time to preserve and foster the relationship
4. The extent to which the opposing parent is motivated by financial reasons
5. Domestic violence, regardless of whether it involves the child
Obviously, a cross-country custody battle is not as easy as just filing legal papers asserting what you want. The process is extremely involved and requires substantial evidence that the proposed custody change will be best for the children. This case provides good reminder that the Courts are there to determine what’s best for the kids—not just what the parents want.
If you are interested in learning more about divorce or family law, please call Wendy Alton at 248-380-9976 or email her at walton@fb-firm.com.
Experienced and practical Michigan attorneys solving the problems of business owners, their families, and veterans... one case at a time.
Showing posts with label proper cause. Show all posts
Showing posts with label proper cause. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Thursday, October 14, 2010
In Custody Hearings, the Judge Cannot Just Rely on Friend of the Court’s Recommendation
by Wendy Alton
In Michigan, if a parent has proven to the court that there has been a change in circumstance or proper cause to consider a change in custody, the court will generally ask Friend of the Court to make a custody recommendation. Friend of the Court will investigate and make a recommendation to the Court after a full analysis of the best interests of the child by weighing the following factors:
(1) The love, affection & other emotional ties existing between the parties involved & the child.
(2) The capacity & disposition of the parties involved to give the child love, affection & guidance and to continue the education & raising of the child in his or her religion or creed, if any.
(3) The capacity & disposition of the parties involved to provide the child with food, clothing, medical care or other remedial care recognized and permitted under the laws of this state in place of medical care, and other material needs.
(4) The length of time the child has lived in a stable, satisfactory environment & the desirability of maintaining continuity.
(5) The permanence, as a family unit, of the existing or proposed custodial home or homes.
(6) The moral fitness of the parties involved.
(7) The mental & physical health of the parties involved.
(8) The home, school & community record of the child.
(9) The reasonable preference of the child, if the court considers the child to be of sufficient age to express preference.
(10) The willingness & ability of each of the parties to facilitate & encourage a close & continuing parent-child relationship between the child & the other parent or the child and the parents.
(11) Domestic violence, regardless of whether the violence was directed against or witnessed by the child.
(12) Any other factor considered by the court to be relevant to a particular child custody dispute.
After analysis of these factors, the Friend of the Court will then issue a written report and recommendation that is submitted to the parents and to the Judge. The Judge will review and consider the recommendation.
However, the Judge cannot just adopt the recommendation without hearing testimony and considering evidence. This requirement was reiterated in the case of Deling v Lam, unpublished case per curiam of the Michigan Court of Appeals, issued October 7, 2010 (Docket No. 295272). In that case, the trial judge merely adopted the recommendation, which radically changed the physical custody arrangement from joint physical custody to giving the father sole physical custody. The trial judge did not hear testimony or consider evidence—the judge just adopted the recommendation. The mother appealed, and the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s decision, stating that the trial judge improperly delegated its authority by failing to independently evaluate each of the best interest factors. The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s decision and sent the case back to the trial court for a new custody hearing.
In issues of custody and parenting time, it is extremely important to understand not only what your rights are as a parent, but also to fully understand every step in the process.
If you are interested in learning more about divorce or family law, please call Wendy Alton at 248-380-9976 or email her at walton@fb-firm.com.
In Michigan, if a parent has proven to the court that there has been a change in circumstance or proper cause to consider a change in custody, the court will generally ask Friend of the Court to make a custody recommendation. Friend of the Court will investigate and make a recommendation to the Court after a full analysis of the best interests of the child by weighing the following factors:
(1) The love, affection & other emotional ties existing between the parties involved & the child.
(2) The capacity & disposition of the parties involved to give the child love, affection & guidance and to continue the education & raising of the child in his or her religion or creed, if any.
(3) The capacity & disposition of the parties involved to provide the child with food, clothing, medical care or other remedial care recognized and permitted under the laws of this state in place of medical care, and other material needs.
(4) The length of time the child has lived in a stable, satisfactory environment & the desirability of maintaining continuity.
(5) The permanence, as a family unit, of the existing or proposed custodial home or homes.
(6) The moral fitness of the parties involved.
(7) The mental & physical health of the parties involved.
(8) The home, school & community record of the child.
(9) The reasonable preference of the child, if the court considers the child to be of sufficient age to express preference.
(10) The willingness & ability of each of the parties to facilitate & encourage a close & continuing parent-child relationship between the child & the other parent or the child and the parents.
(11) Domestic violence, regardless of whether the violence was directed against or witnessed by the child.
(12) Any other factor considered by the court to be relevant to a particular child custody dispute.
After analysis of these factors, the Friend of the Court will then issue a written report and recommendation that is submitted to the parents and to the Judge. The Judge will review and consider the recommendation.
However, the Judge cannot just adopt the recommendation without hearing testimony and considering evidence. This requirement was reiterated in the case of Deling v Lam, unpublished case per curiam of the Michigan Court of Appeals, issued October 7, 2010 (Docket No. 295272). In that case, the trial judge merely adopted the recommendation, which radically changed the physical custody arrangement from joint physical custody to giving the father sole physical custody. The trial judge did not hear testimony or consider evidence—the judge just adopted the recommendation. The mother appealed, and the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s decision, stating that the trial judge improperly delegated its authority by failing to independently evaluate each of the best interest factors. The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s decision and sent the case back to the trial court for a new custody hearing.
In issues of custody and parenting time, it is extremely important to understand not only what your rights are as a parent, but also to fully understand every step in the process.
If you are interested in learning more about divorce or family law, please call Wendy Alton at 248-380-9976 or email her at walton@fb-firm.com.
Friday, October 8, 2010
Less Transition for Children not Proper Cause to Change Parenting Time
by Wendy Alton
When going through a divorce in Michigan, it is extremely important to carefully agree upon a parenting time schedule with your children that will work for a long period to come. Some parents decide to share joint physical custody—meaning that both parents aim to spend as much time as they can with their children, usually resulting in half of the child’s time with one parent and half with the other.
What usually results in such an agreement is that the children rotate houses every week (one week with one parent and the next with the other parent), or the children spend some days in the week with one parent, and the other days in the week with the other parent. Obviously, the latter arrangement results in many transitions for the children, as they are rotating houses up to 3-4 times per week.
In the case of Stelman v Stelman, unpublished case per curiam of the Michigan Court of Appeals, issued August 3, 2010 (Docket No. 294105), the parents had such an agreement. The children were with their father 4 nights in the 1st and 3rd weeks of the month, and 2 nights in the 2nd and 4th weeks of the month. During the summer months, the parents took full alternating weeks. The father in Stelman sought a parenting time change, asking the court to change the parenting time to alternating weeks throughout the entire year. Under his current parenting time plan, he spent 12 overnights with his children, and his proposed would increase it slightly to 14 overnights with his children. Thus, the amount of overnights with the children would remain consistent. What the father proposed is that alternating weeks throughout the entire year would be a better plan because it would reduce the amount of transitions for the children by about half.
Oakland County Circuit Court ruled that his reason for seeking the change (reducing transitions), did not meet the threshold required for seeking a modification of parenting time. The Court of Appeals agreed. In Michigan, in order to seek a modification of parenting time, you must provide the court with evidence that there has been a change in circumstances or there is proper cause for seeking the change. Both courts were very clear that just a new proposal that reduced transitions did not meet the required evidence of change in circumstances or proper cause. The father never showed “what had changed” to make the existing parenting time schedule in need of modification. Just seeking a new arrangement to reduce transition for the children is not enough for the court to change the parenting time schedule.
If you are going through a divorce with children, it cannot be emphasized enough that you have good legal counsel to help you decide issues of custody and parenting time. Your decision becomes final and unchangeable unless there has been a change in circumstances or proper cause—this is a difficult evidentiary burden to meet. The decisions made in your divorce have long-lasting effects on you and your children—and you should be assisted by an attorney who can educate and advise you so you understand the full ramifications of your decision.
If you are interested in learning more about divorce or family law, please call Wendy Alton at 248-380-9976 or email her at walton@fb-firm.com.
When going through a divorce in Michigan, it is extremely important to carefully agree upon a parenting time schedule with your children that will work for a long period to come. Some parents decide to share joint physical custody—meaning that both parents aim to spend as much time as they can with their children, usually resulting in half of the child’s time with one parent and half with the other.
What usually results in such an agreement is that the children rotate houses every week (one week with one parent and the next with the other parent), or the children spend some days in the week with one parent, and the other days in the week with the other parent. Obviously, the latter arrangement results in many transitions for the children, as they are rotating houses up to 3-4 times per week.
In the case of Stelman v Stelman, unpublished case per curiam of the Michigan Court of Appeals, issued August 3, 2010 (Docket No. 294105), the parents had such an agreement. The children were with their father 4 nights in the 1st and 3rd weeks of the month, and 2 nights in the 2nd and 4th weeks of the month. During the summer months, the parents took full alternating weeks. The father in Stelman sought a parenting time change, asking the court to change the parenting time to alternating weeks throughout the entire year. Under his current parenting time plan, he spent 12 overnights with his children, and his proposed would increase it slightly to 14 overnights with his children. Thus, the amount of overnights with the children would remain consistent. What the father proposed is that alternating weeks throughout the entire year would be a better plan because it would reduce the amount of transitions for the children by about half.
Oakland County Circuit Court ruled that his reason for seeking the change (reducing transitions), did not meet the threshold required for seeking a modification of parenting time. The Court of Appeals agreed. In Michigan, in order to seek a modification of parenting time, you must provide the court with evidence that there has been a change in circumstances or there is proper cause for seeking the change. Both courts were very clear that just a new proposal that reduced transitions did not meet the required evidence of change in circumstances or proper cause. The father never showed “what had changed” to make the existing parenting time schedule in need of modification. Just seeking a new arrangement to reduce transition for the children is not enough for the court to change the parenting time schedule.
If you are going through a divorce with children, it cannot be emphasized enough that you have good legal counsel to help you decide issues of custody and parenting time. Your decision becomes final and unchangeable unless there has been a change in circumstances or proper cause—this is a difficult evidentiary burden to meet. The decisions made in your divorce have long-lasting effects on you and your children—and you should be assisted by an attorney who can educate and advise you so you understand the full ramifications of your decision.
If you are interested in learning more about divorce or family law, please call Wendy Alton at 248-380-9976 or email her at walton@fb-firm.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)