A trial court erred in denying a court-appointed attorney’s “full fee request” without first making findings as to the reasonableness of the attorney fees, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

The trial court properly dismissed the plaintiffs’ legal malpractice claim against the defendant and his law firm because one of the plaintiffs repeatedly engaged in the unauthorized practice of law, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

Court of Appeals conflict panel holds that a stipulated final order does not require reservation of appellate rights language in order to review interlocutory order. Dramshop Act does not bar claims for negligence related to hiring, training and supervision of employee unrelated to actions of intoxicated patron.

The Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled that the notice requirement in the Mental Health Code – specifically MCL 330.1453(1) – does not apply to the initial process of obtaining mental health evaluations.

In denying a divorced mother’s request for a change of domicile for herself and the parties’ children, the trial court made a “procedural misstep” by not properly addressing the 100-mile rule.

The Trial Court’s best interest analysis in terminating Respondent-Father’s parental rights was “erroneously incomplete” due to the Trial Court’s failure to consider CJM’s placement with a “relative” as defined by MCL 712A.13a(1)(j) during the best interest determination.

The trial court in this child-protective proceeding did not “articulate an adequate basis or make sufficient factual findings to justify its denial of jurisdiction” over the minor child, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

In this dispute over trust proceeds, the probate court correctly altered the decedent’s “special needs trust” to direct that the proceeds go to the decedent’s estate rather than to the trust’s residuary beneficiary, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

In this suit contesting the validity of a divorce judgment, the trial court correctly held that it did not have subject-matter jurisdiction and, as a result, properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary disposition, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

When a mother seeks to revoke an acknowledgment of parentage based on MCL 722.1445 – due to the child having been conceived by nonconsensual sexual penetration – the three-year limitation period contained in MCL 722.1437 does not apply, nor does the best interest analysis under MCL 722.1443(4) or (13). The case is remanded to the trial court to hold an evidentiary hearing so that it can make the appropriate fact findings under MCL 722.1445 by clear and convincing evidence.

The trial court properly denied the plaintiff’s postjudgment motion to revoke paternity under the Revocation of Paternity Act (ROPA), the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

The trial court in this child removal case properly accepted the respondent-mother’s waiver of a probable cause hearing and did not err by enforcing that waiver in subsequent proceedings, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

The trial court in this custody matter improperly refused to hold an evidentiary hearing on the plaintiff-mother’s request to modify custody and parenting time, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the Trial Court’s order on the basis that the Trial Court could not take jurisdiction because the minor child is protected under a no-contact order with Respondent and the minor child is living in a fit home environment with the non-respondent mother, who has been protecting the minor child and meeting her needs.

The probate court in this Mental Health Code case properly ordered the respondent to undergo a combined program of hospitalization and outpatient services, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled, finding that the probate court had subject-matter jurisdiction over the matter.

The Trial Court did not clearly err when it determined termination of Respondent-Father’s parental rights was appropriate under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), (g), and (j) and that termination was in the minor child, KS’, best interests.