ARCHIVES
Law Offices WebsiteBlog Home |
MCL 722.31 and MCR 3.211(C) by Michael B. Skinner · Tuesday May 12, 2009 12:38 pm PERMALINK In Brausch v Brausch, the court considered whether the mother could move the couples' son more than 100 miles away without court approval if the judgment of divorce allowed such a move. The court concluded that MCL 722.31 allows such a move with the consent of the other parent or the trial court (after a review of certain factors), but that a parent with sole custody does not req uire the same authorization. According to the court, under MCL 722.31 and MCR 3.211(C), a parent with sole custody must obtain trial court authorization for such a move, but not under the same standard as a joint custody arrangement under 722.31. Also, as is par for the course in child custody issues, the parties cannot waive the trial court's duty to review such a move as part of the divorce. PS. The court continued a recent pattern of hitting litigants for not raising arguments in the questions presented section, finding that the arguments are therefore waived. MCR 7.212(C)(5). Often, as in Brausch, the hits are just slaps on the wrist and come in the form "argument waived, but the argument is meritless because . . ." In some other cases, the court uses a 7.212(C)(5) as a sledgehammer, finding waiver of meritorious arguments, no matter how extensively briefed, if not stated in the questions presented, or even stated explicitly enough. | |
