The trial court “committed clear legal error” in this custody case by not applying the “parental presumption” or making the required best-interest determination before ordering that the plaintiff-mother’s child remain with the defendant, a putative father who had no legal rights to the child.

The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the Trial Court’s order dismissing the paternity action because the Trial Court was the appropriate venue for the paternity action under the Paternity Act, MCL 722.711 et seq, and the Friend of the Court’s motion to dismiss was improper as it was outside the scope of the Friend of the Court’s statutory authority pursuant to MCL 552.501(2).

The Trial Court erred when it compelled Appellant to provide a DNA sample to establish that Appellee was the biological son of decedent.

A trial court improperly held that the surname of a child born out of wedlock should be changed from the mother’s surname to the biological father’s surname.

Adoption appeals frequently involve situations that require immediate action by the courts, which means emergency motions must be filed.

A father remained responsible for more than $40,000 in unpaid child support from a 1992 paternity case because the 10-year statute of limitations for enforcing child-support orders.

In In re LMB, the Court of Appeals held that entry of an order of filiation while an adoption appeal was pending mooted the adoption appeal.

The COA released a published opinion providing some clarification on whether paternity actions can ever take precedence over adoption proceedings.