The statute that permits Michigan trial courts to impose court costs on convicted criminal defendants is not unconstitutional on its face, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

The Michigan Supreme Court has ruled that the trial court improperly took jurisdiction of children & placed them in foster care because there was insufficient evidence of “educational neglect”.

The trial court improperly denied the petitioner’s request to change his legal name based on his criminal record.

A trial court erred by denying the petitioner’s request for a personal protection order (PPO) based on the prior denial of a similar PPO request by the petitioner.

The Court stated that the trial court erred when it found by clear and convincing evidence that termination of parental rights to the minor child was proper.

A trial court is not prohibited by the court rules from giving interim effect to a referee’s recommended order that changes custody pending a judicial hearing on an objection to the recommendation.

A defendant’s first-degree child abuse conviction must be vacated because defense counsel’s performance at trial was “deficient”.

The trial court in this defamation case erred by striking an attorney’s affidavit and precluding the attorney from testifying.

The plaintiff issued subpoenas to the defendant’s employer seeking email communications that the defendant sent to his attorney via his employer-provided email address.

The trial court’s order removing the minor child from the respondent’s care must be vacated because the respondent was denied her fundamental right to procedural due process.

The trial court improperly dismissed an authorized petition to terminate the respondent’s parental rights because it did not issue a decision on the merits of the case.

The trial court in this dog-bite case improperly granted summary disposition to the animal’s owners, because the dog was not provoked by the victim.

The father was erroneously granted joint physical & legal custody, because the trial court improperly conflated his motion to change custody with the mother’s motion to change domicile.

The trial court failed to conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine whether she had established the required proper cause or change in circumstances.

The trial court correctly modified the parties’ custody order to give the mother sole legal and physical custody of the children.

In this divorce action, the trial court properly held that a postnuptial agreement the parties had entered into did not violate public policy and was enforceable, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.