The Trial Court plainly erred when it found that Respondent-Mother was not entitled to reasonable efforts to reunify Respondent-Mother with her minor children and when it failed to inform Respondent-Mother of her appellate rights following the Trial Court’s removal of the children from Respondent-Mother’s care.

The trial court erroneously suspended the plaintiff-father’s supervised parenting time, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

Father’s parental rights properly terminated though the decision to do so was partly based on the testimony of a social worker with disciplinary proceedings.

The trial court’s termination of the respondents’ parental rights must be vacated because, among other things, the statutory factors for termination were not supported by clear and convincing evidence.