Skip to main content

August 2016

Aug 2016
31
August 31, 2016

COA again determines that the claims records of the Michigan Catastrophic Claims Association are not subject to disclosure

On remand from the Michigan Supreme Court, in Coalition Protecting Auto No-Fault v. Michigan Catastrophic Claims Association, No. 314310, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that the Michigan Catastrophic Claims Association (MCCA) is a public body for purposes of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).  It further held that the enactment of MCL 500.134(4)—which provides a statutory exemption to FOIA—did not violate the state constitution and that MCCA’s records are exempt from disclosure under MCL 500.134(4) and (6)(c).

Aug 2016
29
August 29, 2016

COA holds that order denying a motion to change schools is not an order affecting the custody of a minor

In Ozimek v. Rodgers, No. 331726, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that an order denying a motion to change schools is not an order affecting the custody of a child under the Michigan Court Rule regarding jurisdiction, MCR 7.202(6)(a)(iii).  Therefore, in this case, the Court did not have jurisdiction over plaintiff’s appeal.

Aug 2016
29
August 29, 2016

COA holds that order denying a motion to change schools is not an order affecting the custody of a minor

In Ozimek v. Rodgers, No. 331726, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that an order denying a motion to change schools is not an order affecting the custody of a child under the Michigan Court Rule regarding jurisdiction, MCR 7.202(6)(a)(iii).  Therefore, in this case, the Court did not have jurisdiction over plaintiff’s appeal.

Aug 2016
29
August 29, 2016

COA holds that petitioner failed to rebut the fit-parent presumption in grandparenting time petition

In Zawilanski v. Marshall, No. 330495, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that in order to overcome a fit parent’s decision to deny grandparenting time, the petitioner must overcome a rebuttable presumption that the fit-parent’s denial does not create a substantial risk of harm to the minor-child’s mental, physical, or emotional health.  Here, the Court held the referee and trial court did not require the petitioner to rebut this presumption and thus committed clear legal error.

Aug 2016
29
August 29, 2016

COA holds that order requiring instant makeup of parenting time is not an order that affects custody and therefore is not appealable by right

In Madson v. Jaso, No. 331605, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that a provisional post-judgment order for makeup parenting time is not an order affecting the custody of a child under the Michigan Court Rule regarding jurisdiction, MCR 7.202(6)(a)(iii).  Therefore, in this case, the Court did not have jurisdiction over plaintiff’s appeal.

Displaying results 1-6 (of 18)
 |<  < 1 - 2 - 3  >  >| 

NOTICE. Although we would like to hear from you, we cannot represent you until we know that doing so will not create a conflict of interest. Also, we cannot treat unsolicited information as confidential. Accordingly, please do not send us any information about any matter that may involve you until you receive a written statement from us that we represent you.

By clicking the ‘ACCEPT’ button, you agree that we may review any information you transmit to us. You recognize that our review of your information, even if you submitted it in a good faith effort to retain us, and even if you consider it confidential, does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could and will be used against you.

Please click the ‘ACCEPT’ button if you understand and accept the foregoing statement and wish to proceed.

ACCEPTCANCEL

Text

+ -

Reset