A divorced mother was improperly ordered to direct half of her developmentally disabled child’s government benefits to her ex-husband, who is the child’s father.

The Michigan Court of Appeals reversed the protective orders that were issued in these consolidated appeals, ruling the probate court “put the cart before the horse”.

An employee who was laid-off after 1) reported a co-worker’s conduct to supervisors & 2) considered notifying the police of the conduct didn’t offer enough evidence to proceed with a retaliation claim.

In People v Maliszewski, it was brought to the Trial Court’s attention that one of the jurors had used Wikipedia to define “reasonable doubt” and “corroborating evidence.”

A parent in a former same-sex relationship challenged the other parent’s custodial rights by arguing that the probate court who granted the adoption lacked subject matter jurisdiction because it was same-sex adoption.

You surely are familiar with the adage, "the man who represents himself has a fool for a client." This phrase took on special meaning in the COA decision People v Cochrane, in which the Court determined that the trial court did not err in refusing to allow a criminal defendant to represent himself.

The COA prohibited a trial attorney from recovering additional fees for his work in Reed v Breton. In that case, the trial attorney had a one-third contingency fee agreement with the plaintiff, but the agreement excluded any appeals.