Careers

Experiences

Industries

Offices

Our Firm

Pages

Our People

Updates

Practices

Warner Norcross + Judd LLP is a corporate law firm with over 230 attorneys serving clients in nine offices throughout Michigan. Among the largest law firms in Michigan, Warner works in virtually all areas of business law.

Michigan Law Firm - Warner Norcross + Judd LLP

In <a href="http://publicdocs.courts.mi.gov:81/OPINIONS/FINAL/COA/20150519_C323124_73_323124.OPN.PDF" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener"><em>Howard v. Howard</em>, No. 323124</a>, the Court of Appeals held that in custody disputes initiated by natural parents, Michigan’s Child Custody Act allows third-party custodians to contest a natural parent’s claim that awarding custody to the natural parent serves a child’s best interests.&nbsp; Therefore, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s order granting custody to a third-party custodian.

contentpilot/introduction

Defendant Howard (“Defendant”) and Tyronna Howard had two minor children. The couple divorced and the court granted Tyronna primary physical custody with extensive parenting time to Defendant. Tyronna fell ill and prior to her death, her children moved in with her brother, Blackburn.&nbsp; After Tyronna’s death, Defendant filed an ex parte motion to enforce the judgment of divorce and return the children to him, alleging that Blackburn refused to return the children.&nbsp; Blackburn asserted that Tyronna entrusted her children to him because Defendant suffered from several health problems and lived in a one-bedroom assisted living facility.&nbsp; Defendant argued Blackburn lacked standing and should not be allowed to participate in the proceedings. Defendant also claimed the parental presumption owed to natural parents under MCL 722.25(1) was in his favor, and no third party with standing could rebut the presumption by clear and convincing evidence.&nbsp; The trial court found that it was in the minor children’s best interests to award Blackburn custody. The primary issue on appeal involved whether Blackburn lacked standing to rebut the parental presumption under MCL 722.25(1).

core/paragraph

The Court of Appeals held that whether Blackburn had standing was not an issue because Defendant initiated the custody dispute against Blackburn. The court agreed that under MCL 722.25(1), there is a presumption that the best interests of a child are served by awarding custody to the natural parent, unless the contrary is established by clear and convincing evidence.&nbsp; However, the presumption can be rebutted.&nbsp; The court reasoned that the plain language of MCL 722.25(1) allowed Blackburn, a third-party custodian, to present evidence contesting Defendant’s claim that awarding custody to him served the children’s best interests.&nbsp; Accordingly, the trial court properly applied the parental presumption in MCL 722.25(1), conducted a best-interest hearing, and allowed Blackburn to present evidence rebutting the parental presumption. Therefore, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s determination.

Partner

Jason L. Byrne

Labor and Employment

COA: Michigan’s Child Custody Act allows third-party custodians to rebut the parental presumption

Warner Norcross + Judd LLP is responsible for the contents of our advertising and this website. Please read our full <a href="/privacy-policy/" aria-label="see privacy policy">privacy policy</a> available on our website. If you have any questions or comments about our website or our Privacy Policy please contact us at <a href="mailto:info@wnj.com">info@wnj.com</a> or 616.752.2000. 

COA: Michigan’s Child Custody Act allows third-party custodians to rebut the parental presumption

professionals