Sturgis v. Sturgis
302 Mich. App. 706
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Plaintiff appeals trial court’s ruling on defendant’s custodial-change motion and on reinstating parenting time.
- Plaintiff seeks a de novo hearing on termination of parental rights; argues statutory requirement exists.
- Trial court exercised jurisdiction but divided matter to Wayne Circuit Court juvenile section to conserve resources.
- Wayne Circuit Court’s work-plan divided juvenile and domestic relations sections with parallel authority.
- Trial court chose to route termination matter to juvenile section; court did not err legally.
- Court affirms in part and reverses in part.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| De novo hearing requirement for termination motion | MCL 552.507(4) requires a de novo hearing. | Termination not ruled on by referee; no de novo hearing needed. | No de novo hearing required. |
| Jurisdiction and division of labor for termination case | Court should decide termination; division was error. | Division to conserve resources; not legally erroneous. | Not legally erroneous to assign to juvenile section. |
| Best interests and likelihood of abuse during parenting time | There was a reasonable likelihood of abuse/neglect; parenting time should be restricted. | No clear error; best interests supported by record. | Finding of no reasonable likelihood of abuse/neglect was against the weight of the evidence; parts reversed. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re AP, 283 Mich App 574 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009) (discusses court division of labor and authority in family matters; supports court’s scheduling discretion)
- Shade v Wright, 291 Mich App 17 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010) (abuse of discretion and great weight standard in parenting-time rulings)
- Heindlmeyer v Ottawa Co. Concealed Weapons Licensing Bd, 268 Mich App 202 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005) (de novo hearing framework; rendering own decision on evidence)