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.

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 order from which the respondent appealed in this termination of parental rights case was not a “final order” pursuant to the court rules, a Michigan Court of Appeals majority has decided.

A trial court erred by exercising jurisdiction over a juvenile, therefore, the order terminating the respondent-father’s parental rights to the child had to be vacated.