"The Legal Corner" provides a summary of recent Michigan Supreme Court and Michigan Court of Appeals decisions relevant to the child support program, as well as recently released state memoranda.
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS
The
Michigan Supreme Court and the State Court Administrative Office have
developed and are continually updating a COVID-19 response plan to assist the
state’s judiciary. The plan focuses on fulfilling three key obligations: to
protect the health of litigants, judicial branch employees, and the public
using court facilities; to maintain critical judicial branch functions; and to
provide appropriate judicial input to the process of protecting the public.
A number of Administrative Orders have been issued in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, available on the judicial COVID-19 News and Resources web page or on the Administrative Orders page.
UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS
Under Michigan
court rule, unpublished decisions are not considered authoritative. They are
cited here to illustrate points of interest for future similar cases.
Jones v Foley, unpublished opinion of the Court of Appeals, released September 24,
2020 (Docket No. 350610). The trial court did not need to hear medical evidence to conclude
defendant had a substance abuse issue when there was other evidence such as her
drunk driving accident and various witness’ testimony of her intoxication.
Daniels v Daniels, unpublished opinion of the Court of Appeals, released
September 17, 2020 (Docket No. 348950). When parties’ incomes vary throughout the year, using the last full year
of income in support calculations is warranted, rather than projecting income
based on a partial year of wages.
Olivero v Olivero, unpublished opinion of the Court of Appeals, released
September 10, 2020 (Docket No. 348747). The trial court erred by disregarding 2017 Michigan Child Support Formula
2.01(G) which bars imputing overtime pay, even if the parent “has chosen to cease
working additional hours” or is “refusing overtime.”
Hanshue v Hanshue, unpublished opinion of the Court of Appeals, released
August 27, 2020 (Docket No. 350658). Although the trial court was not required to interview the child, the
trial court plainly erred by relying on the parties’ opinions of the child’s
preference, rather than determining whether the child had the capacity to form
a preference, what school placement the child preferred, and whether that
preference was reasonable.
Osborne v Osborne, unpublished opinion of the Court of Appeals, released
August 13, 2020 (Docket No. 352257). Awarding plaintiff legal and physical custody was warranted when the
trial court found that defendant’s hatred for plaintiff “interfered with
everything” and that she would never be able to put plaintiff in a positive
light for the children after hearing evidence of defendant sewing a recording
device into the child’s clothing to monitor plaintiff’s parenting time, her
failure to be honest with the court about the eavesdropping behavior, and
subjecting the children to questioning and examination by doctors, Child
Protective Services workers, and law enforcement officials regarding unfounded
allegations of abuse by plaintiff.
Fatteh v Fatteh, unpublished opinion of the Court of Appeals, released July
30, 2020 (Docket No. 351182). The trial court did not err in finding that plaintiff’s requested change
to a week-on, week-off parenting time schedule would be in the best interests
of the children when defendant was subjecting the children to unnecessary
medical appointments and treatments and failing to provide plaintiff with
accurate information for both medical and school appointments.
Cooper v Cooper, unpublished opinion of the Court of Appeals, released July
23, 2020 (Docket No. 352386). Because the temporary emergency North Carolina custody order did not
become a permanent order, the court could not adopt it as its own permanent
order; rather, the application of the standard analytical framework for
modifying custody under Michigan law per MCL 722.24(1) needed to be conducted.
Dawnson v Wiedenbeck, unpublished opinion of the Court of Appeals, released June 18, 2020 (Docket No. 350795). While perhaps the trial court should not have used psychiatric or psychological nomenclature, the court had a plethora of objective evidence of actions by plaintiff that did not require a medical diagnosis to have relevance to the issues presented concerning bizarre and unusual behavior that could reasonably and logically call into question whether plaintiff should continue to have custody of the child.
MICHIGAN IV-D MEMORANDUMS (OFFICE OF CHILD SUPPORT)
2020-030 (October 21, 2020) New Hire Reporting Outreach and Compliance
Materials
This IV-D Memorandum announces that OCS will no longer publish employer outreach and compliance materials for new hire reporting on mi-support. OCS has revised Michigan IV-D Child Support Manual Section 3.10, “New Hire” to remove references to specific new hire reporting materials. Significant changes to Section 3.10 since its last publication are indicated by a change bar in the right margin of the manual section.
2020-029 (October 1, 2020) Contract Performance Standards During Fiscal Year
2021
This IV-D Memorandum discusses the approach OCS plans to take in evaluating partner offices using the Contract Performance Standards (CPS) during fiscal year (FY) 2021, which begins on October 1, 2020. No office will be required to provide a Response Questionnaire or a Corrective Action Plan for FY 2020.
2020-028 (September 28, 2020) Transition to a New Vendor for the Michigan State
Disbursement Unit (MiSDU)
The Michigan IV-D program has
contracted with Conduent State & Local Solutions, Inc. (Conduent) to
administer MiSDU services. The transition from the current vendor, Informatix,
Inc., to Conduent will be complete on November 30, 2020.
This IV-D Memorandum discusses the following changes that will occur with the transition:
- A new prepaid debit card on which custodial parties (CPs) will receive their child support payments;
- A new system IV-D staff may use to view MiSDU correspondence, view payment processing details, and electronically submit the Request for Central Receipt Adjustment/Suspense Work (DHS-307); and
- A new web-based payment service on the MiSDU.com website that non-custodial parents (NCPs) and employers will use to submit child support payments.
This IV-D Memorandum also
discusses the communication plan to notify child support customers and IV-D
staff about these changes.
Updates to forms and other policy materials are expected during the transition. OCS will issue updates and provide further guidance in future email notifications, IV-D Memorandums, and Michigan IV-D Child Support Manual revisions. Furthermore, the MiSDU will continue to develop and implement improvements after November 30, 2020. OCS will inform IV-D staff as these improvements are made available.
2020-027 (September 14, 2020) FIPS Code Verification, International Case
Indicators, and Hearing Notifications Via CSENet
This IV-D Memorandum announces updates to MiCSES to comply with federal regulations and the 2017 version of Automated Systems for Child Support Enforcement: A Guide for States. These updates will: prevent the entry of an unverified FIPS code; allow a case to be identified as a Hague Child Support Convention case or a foreign reciprocating country (FRC) case; and generate a CSENet transaction when a hearing is scheduled to establish paternity or establish a support order for an intergovernmental case. These updates will be available in MiCSES with the 10.5 Release on September 18, 2020.
2020-026 (September 14, 2020) Case Inventory Form Updates Regarding IV-D
Confidentiality
This IV-D Memorandum announces changes to the use of the Case Inventory Addendum (MC 21) as a result of an amendment to Michigan Court Rule (MCR) 3.206(A)(3). The MC 21 is now considered a confidential document, not subject to service requirements, and available only to the filing party, the filing party’s attorney, the court, and the FOC. This IV-D Memorandum also introduces a new version of the MC 21 in the Michigan Child Support Enforcement System (MiCSES). This version, Template 1101, will be prepopulated with case information stored in MiCSES and will allow IV-D staff to edit the information as needed.
This IV-D Memorandum replaces and obsoletes IV-D Memorandum 2019-012, IV-D Confidentiality, Family Violence, and the Case Inventory Addendum.
2020-025 (August 28, 2020) New Process for Securely Providing a Personal
Identification Number (PIN) to Authenticated MiChildSupport Portal Users
This IV-D Memorandum announces the ability for IV-D workers to view and share the PIN that customers use to access the MiChildSupport Portal. It also announces a new process for IV-D workers to manually authenticate (verify) a customer’s identity in order to securely provide the PIN.
2020-024 (August 17, 2020) Genetic Testing Sample Collection During the
COVID-19 Pandemic
Note: This Memorandum replaces
Memorandum 2020-014 Genetic Testing Sample
Collection During the COVID-19 Pandemic.
This IV-D Memorandum updates and replaces the policy in IV-D Memorandum 2020-014, Genetic Testing Sample Collection During the COVID-19 Pandemic. IV-D Memorandum 2020-014 announced the restart of the genetic testing process on June 1, 2020. In the restarted sample collection process, there is a revised process to ensure a “no direct physical contact” specimen collection. This process, which is introduced in this IV-D Memorandum, is intended to protect customers and IV-D staff. This memorandum also discusses acquiring personal protective equipment (PPE) to be used in sample collection.
