Shiawassee How a decison to change custody is made.(810) 235-1970

The burden of proof is established by the Shiawassee court’s initial finding on whether an established custodial environment exists.

If an established custodial environment exists, a change may be made only on clear and convincing evidence that the change is in the best interests of the child. MCL 722.27; Duperon v Duperon, 175 Mich App 77, 437 NW2d 318 (1989); Arndt v Kasem, 156 Mich App 706, 402 NW2d 77 (1986). see http://www.attorneybankert.com


A party challenging an established custodial environment has a heavy burden, “intended to minimize the prospect of unwarranted and disruptive change of custody orders and to erect a barrier against removal of a child … except in the most compelling cases.” Baker v Baker, 411 Mich 567, 576–577, 309 NW2d 532 (1981).

A finding of equality or near equality on the best interests factors will not necessarily prevent a party from satisfying this burden on a motion to change custody. Heid v AAASulewski, 209 Mich App 587, 532 NW2d 205 (1995). see http://www.dumpmyspouse.com



To meet the burden, it was not enough to show that the child preferred the father, that the father had a better standard of living, and that he was more conscientious than the mother, who tended to be tardy. Carson v Carson, 156 Mich App 291, 401 NW2d 632 (1986). More than a marginal improvement in the child’s life is required to justify a change under this standard. Harper v Harper, 199 Mich App 409, 502 NW2d 731 (1993).

If no established custodial environment exists, custody may be modified by showing by a preponderance of the evidence that a change would be in the best interests of the child, using the best interest factors identified in MCL 722.23. Pierron v Pierron, 486 Mich 81, 782 NW2d 480 (2010); Hall v Hall, 156 Mich App 286, 401 NW2d 353 (1986).

Are you inm financial hard times? see www.nojoketobebroke.com