MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS DECISIONS

PUBLISHED AND UNPUBLISHED SEE: http://courts.mi.gov/courts/coa/opinions/pages/zipfiles.aspx

Lee v. Smith, published per curiam, released May 19, 2015. (Docket No. 320123). Even absent agreement of the parties, courts may award post-majority support for a child who is residing with the payee and attending high school on a full-time basis with a reasonable expectation of completing sufficient credits to graduate.

Howard and Blackburn v. Howard, published per curiam, released May 19, 2015. (Docket No. 323124).  Notwithstanding the parental presumption, when a parent with joint legal custody, but without physical custody, petitions for custody, a nonparent with whom the children live has standing to rebut the parental presumption by proving that the best interests factors favor the nonparent by clear and convincing evidence.

Graham v. Foster, published per curiam, released June 16, 2015. (Docket No. 318487). Where the alleged biological father of a child born to an intact marriage sues under the Revocation of Paternity Act to revoke husband’s paternity, the husband is a necessary party to the action.

Maier v. Maier, published per curiam, released June 25, 2015. (Docket No. 322109). In a child custody dispute it is not necessary for the court to interview the child to determine the child’s reasonable preference if the court can use other evidence to do so or if other factors such as the child’s emotional state would make the child’s statement of a reasonable preference suspect.

Patterson v. Patterson, unpublished per curiam, released May 14, 2015. (Docket No. 325368).  Parents exercised joint custody and mother proposed a change in custody where the child would have less frequent contact with his father, disrupting the child’s established custodial environment , requiring clear and convincing evidence that the change was in the child’s best interests.

Bray v. Bray, unpublished per curiam, released May 19, 2015. (Docket No. 324402). Neither allegations of father’s smoking, drinking, and abuse that existed at the time of the prior custody action nor the addition of a step-parent without allegations that she effected the children’s’ well-being were sufficient to constitute a material change in circumstances sufficient to modify custody.

Sulieman v. Fisher, unpublished per curiam, released May 26, 2015. (Docket No. 320585). Where defendant moved out-of-state two weeks prior to the filing of divorce, changed her driver’s license and mailing address, moved into a new home, and actively sought employment in the new state, the trial court did not err in determining that defendant was not a resident of Michigan for 180 days prior to the filing.

Mallison v. Mallison, unpublished per curiam, released May 26, 2015. (Docket No. 321227). Trial court’s decision to impute income at a prior employment amount was reasonable when payer voluntarily reduces income, refuses to appear, and refuses to submit new income paperwork.

Anderson v. Anderson, unpublished per curiam, released June 2, 2015. (Docket No. 321880). Where trial court properly analyzes MCSF factors for imputing income and plaintiff refuses to provide accurate information about income, trial court does not abuse discretion in relying on expert testimony and previous tax returns to impute income.

Atkinson v. Knapp, unpublished per curiam, released June 9, 2015. (Docket No. 324487). When an established custodial environment exists, the remarriage and relocation of one parent away from that environment and the establishment of ties in a new area are not a significant change of circumstances effecting the child’s well-being sufficient to support a change in custody.

Rowe v. Walker, unpublished per curiam, released June 16, 2015. (Docket No. 324874).  In a dispute, between parents with joint legal and physical custody over which elementary school a child would attend, the trial court erred by failing to interview and consider the reasonable preferences of the child even though the child has never attended the proposed school.

Pacitto-Kelmendi v. Kelmendi, unpublished per curiam, released June 23, 2015. (Docket No. 321530). Even though defendant defaulted, where trial court does not make specific findings under the best interest factors, the case should be remanded to the trial court to state its findings and conclusions under the best interest factors.

Belongia v. Belongia, unpublished per curiam, released June 25, 2015. (Docket No. 325208). In initial custody proceeding, trial court erred in finding a possibility that defendant would abuse his prescription medication based solely on the number of pills defendant was prescribed, when there was no other evidence of actual abuse of medications.

Medlej v. Medlej, unpublished per curiam, released July 14, 2015. (Docket No. 321565). Trial court did not err in imputing income to a trained automotive repairman with limited language skills, training, and education at a rate consistent with the Bureau of Labor Statistics national average for the line of work.

Bachman v. Snowgold, unpublished per curiam, released July 14, 2015. (Docket No. 325963). When parents share joint legal and physical custody of the child, both parents regularly exercise parenting time, and the child has an established custodial environment with both parents, absent a demonstration that a change in parenting time would cause the child to no longer to look to one of the parents for guidance, discipline, the necessities of life or parental comfort, the proper threshold for determining whether to change parenting time is the lower proper cause or change in circumstances rather than a substantial change in circumstances. 

Miller v. Plummer, unpublished per curiam, released July 28, 2015. (Docket No. 325411). A joint legal custody relationship in which one party has final decision-making authority only when the parties disagree is inappropriate as the legislature did not intend to provide joint-custody arrangements that assign important decisions to only one parent.

Wehbe v. Wehbe, unpublished per curiam, released July 30, 2015. (Docket No. 325847). Although a finding of contempt of court is not sufficient to establish a change in circumstances to justify changing custody, the parties’ inability to co-parent constituted a sufficient change in circumstances and the court could consider the mother’s contempt  under the best interest factors.

Baughman v. Hartman, unpublished per curiam, released August 4, 2015. (Docket No. 323348). While facts existing before the last effective order do not establish a change in circumstances, once a change in circumstances is established, facts existing before the last effective order may be relevant to the best interest factors.

Ellis v. Ellis, unpublished per curiam, released August 6, 2015. (Docket No. 321972). The arbitrator correctly applied the child support formula when the arbitrator used zero overnights despite the judgment’s provision for reasonable parenting time when the arbitrator determined the father was unlikely to exercise parenting time.

Michigan IV-D Memorandum (Office of Child Support)

2015-016 (July 1, 2015) 2015 Interstate Case Reconciliation (ICR 2015) Project Results

This IV-D Memorandum explains how to use the ICR 2015 project results and correct any inaccurate information found in the Michigan Child Support Enforcement System (MiCSES).

2015-017 (July 24, 2015) Revised Federal Income Withholding for Support Form, Updates to Income Withholding and Lump-Sum Withholding Policy, and Federal Electronic Income Withholding Mandate

This IV-D Memorandum introduces the revised federal Income Withholding for Support form and announces policy updates in Michigan IV-D Child Support Manual Sections 6.03, “Income Withholding,” and 6.09, “Lump-Sum/Bonus.”

2015-018 (July 27, 2015) Remote Access Pilot Program for Designated County IV-D Offices

This IV-D Memorandum announces a new remote access pilot program for designated county IV-D offices. It provides an overview of the pilot, including goals, participants, and evaluation criteria. It also announces future plans to make remote access available for all county IV-D offices.

2015-019 (August 3, 2015) New Text Notification Option for MiCase Users and Updates to Section 1.35, “MiChildSupport Portal,” of the Michigan IV-D Child Support Manual

This IV-D Memorandum discusses an update to the MiCase website. MiCase will allow users to receive text notifications to help them manage their MiCase information. This text-message option will be available to MiCase users on August 8, 2015.

2015-020 (July 30, 2015) Revisions to the Federal Tax Refund Offset (FTRO) Fraud Process and to Michigan IV-D Child Support Manual Section 6.21, “Tax Refund Offset”

This IV-D Memorandum introduces revisions to OCS’s FTRO fraud process that will improve customer service to affected noncustodial parents (NCPs). These revisions will also assist IV-D workers in responding to NCPs who inquire about potentially fraudulent FTRO receipts.