Book-Gilbert v. Greenleaf
302 Mich. App. 538
Mich. Ct. App.2013Background
- Mother died when the child was three; father was homeless and later imprisoned for failure to register as a sex offender.
- McCallister, the paternal grandmother, sought grandparent visitation under MCL 722.27b after DHS involvement.
- The minor child was placed with Angela Tyndall, a relative, in March 2009; visitation with McCallister occurred until August 2009 when Tyndall became guardian and limited visitation.
- DHS gave Tyndall authority to decide on grandparent visitation; she refused further visitation.
- The trial court held two evidentiary hearings and, after delays and incomplete evaluations, ruled that Tyndall as guardian had the fit-parent presumption under MCL 722.27b(4)(b) and denied McCallister’s motion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether guardian can invoke fit-parent presumption | McCallister argues guardian cannot use fit-parent presumption. | Tyndall/guardian contends guardian stands in parental shoes under presumption. | Guardian cannot be treated as fit parent under the presumption |
| Proper application of MCL 722.27b(4)(b) when non-parent guardian is involved | Presumption should not apply to a guardian absent clear statutory language. | Trial court applied presumption to deny visitation. | Presumption cannot be applied to guardians; remand for proper analysis |
| Was the text of MCL 722.27b read in pari materia and properly interpreted | Statutory language must be read as a whole; cannot read guardians into the presumption. | Courts may harmonize related provisions to reach the child’s best interests. | Statute should be read as written; cannot read guardian into presumption |
| Did the court make sufficient factual findings regarding best interests | Trial court failed to make proper findings; record incomplete on credibility. | Guardianship and prior behavior justify the decision. | Remand for proper findings and credibility evaluation |
Key Cases Cited
- Whitman v City of Burton, 493 Mich 303 (2013) (statutory interpretation; plain meaning governs)
- In re Receivership of 11910 South Francis Rd, 492 Mich 208 (2012) (standard for reviewing trial court findings; de novo on legal questions)
- In re Hurd-Marvin Drain, 331 Mich 504 (1951) (avoid surplusage; read statute to effect purpose)
- Mich Basic Prop Ins Ass’n v Office of Fin & Ins Regulation, 288 Mich App 552 (2010) (statutory interpretation; avoid reading in missing provisions)
- Maple Grove Twp v Misteguay Creek Intercounty Drain Bd, 298 Mich App 200 (2012) (in pari materia; read related statutes together)
- In re Beck, 488 Mich 6 (2010) (fundamental liberty interest of parents vs. guardianship)
- Hunter v Hunter, 484 Mich 247 (2009) (parental rights vs. guardianship context)