Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 552.452 (2026)

Hearing; order; contents; burden of proving lack of ability to provide support; amount; medical and other expenses; enforcement of order; custody and parenting time.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

THE FAMILY SUPPORT ACT

Act 138 of 1966

552.452 Hearing; order; contents; burden of proving lack of ability to provide support; amount; medical and other expenses; enforcement of order; custody and parenting time.

Sec. 2.

(1) Upon the hearing of the complaint, in the manner of a motion, the court may enter an order as it determines proper for the support of the petitioner and the minor child or children of the parties as prescribed in section 5 of the support and parenting time enforcement act, 1982 PA 295, MCL 552.605. The order shall provide that payment shall be made to the friend of the court or the state disbursement unit. If the parent complained of opposes the entry of the order upon the ground that he or she is without sufficient financial ability to provide necessary shelter, food, care, clothing, and other support for his or her spouse and child or children, the burden of proving this lack of ability is on the parent against whom the complaint is made. The order shall state in separate paragraphs the amount of support for the petitioner until the further order of the court, and the amount of support for each child until each child reaches 18 years of age or until the further order of the court. Subject to section 5b of the support and parenting time enforcement act, 1982 PA 295, MCL 552.605b, the court may also order support for the child after the child reaches 18 years of age, or until the further order of the court. Support ordered may include expenses of medical, dental, and other health care, child care, and education, necessary medical expenses incurred in connection with the mother's pregnancy or the birth of the child, and the expense of genetic testing. A child support obligation is only retroactive to the date that the complaint for support was filed unless any of the following circumstances exist:

(a) The defendant was avoiding service of process.

(b) The defendant threatened or coerced through domestic violence or other means the complainant not to file a proceeding under this act.

(2) The court shall order medical expenses incurred in connection with the mother's pregnancy or the birth of the child under this section in the same manner as medical expenses are ordered under section 2 of the paternity act, 1956 PA 205, MCL 722.712, and shall include in its order provisions as required by that section for orders entered under that act.

(3) A support order entered under this section is enforceable as provided in the support and parenting time enforcement act, 1982 PA 295, MCL 552.601 to 552.650. If this act contains a specific provision regarding the contents or enforcement of a child support order that conflicts with a provision in the support and parenting time enforcement act, 1982 PA 295, MCL 552.601 to 552.650, this act controls in regard to that provision.

(4) If there is no dispute regarding a child's custody, the court shall include in an order for support issued under this act specific provisions governing custody of and parenting time for the child in accordance with the child custody act of 1970, 1970 PA 91, MCL 722.21 to 722.31. If there is a dispute regarding custody of and parenting time for the child, the court shall include in an order for support issued under this act specific temporary provisions governing custody of and parenting time for the child. Pending a hearing on or other resolution of the dispute, the court may refer the matter to the office of the friend of the court for a written report and recommendation as provided in section 5 of the friend of the court act, 1982 PA 294, MCL 552.505. In a dispute regarding custody of and parenting time for a child, the prosecuting attorney is not required to represent either party regarding the dispute.

History: 1966, Act 138, Eff. Mar. 10, 1967 ;-- Am. 1967, Act 75, Eff. Nov. 2, 1967 ;-- Am. 1970, Act 153, Imd. Eff. Aug. 1, 1970 ;-- Am. 1983, Act 196, Imd. Eff. Nov. 7, 1983 ;-- Am. 1985, Act 212, Eff. Mar. 1, 1986 ;-- Am. 1989, Act 276, Imd. Eff. Dec. 26, 1989 ;-- Am. 1990, Act 237, Imd. Eff. Oct. 10, 1990 ;-- Am. 1990, Act 292, Imd. Eff. Dec. 14, 1990 ;-- Am. 1996, Act 5, Eff. June 1, 1996 ;-- Am. 1999, Act 158, Imd. Eff. Nov. 3, 1999 ;-- Am. 2001, Act 111, Eff. Sept. 30, 2001 ;-- Am. 2002, Act 574, Eff. Dec. 1, 2002 ;-- Am. 2009, Act 236, Imd. Eff. Jan. 8, 2010

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 15 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1980–2026 · leading case: Macomb Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Anderson, 849 N.W.2d 408 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Macomb Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Anderson, 849 N.W.2d 408 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 10× “Plaintiffs argued that, pursuant to MCL 552.452, Glambin was not required to he present at the hearing.”

Smith v. Smith, 447 N.W.2d 715 (Mich. 1989). · cites it 4× “" MCL 552.452(1); MSA 25.222(2). Consequently, due to today's holding by the majority, circuit courts have the authority, when "unusual circumstances" are present, to order a parent who has abandoned a disabled child to pay postmajority child support, but are without authority…”

Burba v. Burba, 610 N.W.2d 873 (Mich. 2000). · cites it 2× “97 (allowing postjudgment alteration of support); MCL 552.452; MSA 25.222(2) (allowing order of support upon custodial parent's complaint); MCL 722.”

Ghidotti v. Barber, 586 N.W.2d 883 (Mich. 1998). · cites it 2× “§ 552.452(2); MSA 25.222(2); the emancipation of minors and rights of parents act, M.”

United States v. Timothy Gordon Faasse, 265 F.3d 475 (6th Cir. 2001). “, Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 552.452 (West 2001) (providing for payment of support to the office of the Michigan friend of the court).”

Foster v. Wolkowitz, 785 N.W.2d 59 (Mich. 2010). “…“specific temporary provisions” concerning custody and parenting time pending resolution of the custody dispute. MCL 552.452(4).”

Sumerix v. Sumerix, 307 N.W.2d 727 (Mich. Ct. App. 1981). “Defendant argues that the Family Support Act, MCL 552.452; MSA 25.222(2), is a legislative response to the holding in Johnson .”

Proudfit v. O'NEAL, 484 N.W.2d 746 (Mich. Ct. App. 1992). “95(2) (divorce act); MCL 552.452(2); MSA 25.222(2)(2) (Family Support Act); MCL 722.”

United States v. Timothy Gordon Faasse, 227 F.3d 660 (6th Cir. 2000). “, Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 552.452 (providing for payment of support to the office of the Michigan friend of the court).”

Witt v. Seabrook, 533 N.W.2d 22 (Mich. Ct. App. 1995). “MCL 552.452(2); MSA 25.222(2)(2). Defendant maintains that the statutory definition of support does not include a mother’s confinement expenses.”

Arnett v. Arnett, 296 N.W.2d 609 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). “) (MCL 552.452; MSA 25.222[2].) *317 The fact that the act requires filing of a verified complaint rather than a complaint accompanied by a supporting affidavit of facts, and that the complaint be heard in the manner of a motion demonstrates a legislative intent to provide an…”

Ryan Price v. Renee Cassata (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “Defendant emphasizes the following facts that allegedly supported her request under MCL 552.452(1)(b) and (c): she never filed a complaint for support because she was fearful of plaintiff’s threatening behavior; she had also been encouraging plaintiff to file a custody complaint…”

Show all 15 citing cases →

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 552.452(1) — 3 cases

Smith v. Smith, 447 N.W.2d 715 (Mich. 1989). “" MCL 552.452(1); MSA 25.222(2). Consequently, due to today's holding by the majority, circuit courts have the authority, when "unusual circumstances" are present, to order a parent who has abandoned a disabled child to pay postmajority child support, but are without authority…”

Macomb Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Anderson, 849 N.W.2d 408 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “Plaintiffs argued that, pursuant to MCL 552.452, Glambin was not required to he present at the hearing.”

Crystal Fox v. Christopher David Sims (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 552.452(1)(b) — 1 case

Ryan Price v. Renee Cassata (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). “Defendant emphasizes the following facts that allegedly supported her request under MCL 552.452(1)(b) and (c): she never filed a complaint for support because she was fearful of plaintiff’s threatening behavior; she had also been encouraging plaintiff to file a custody complaint…”

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 552.452(2) — 4 cases

Ghidotti v. Barber, 586 N.W.2d 883 (Mich. 1998). “§ 552.452(2); MSA 25.222(2); the emancipation of minors and rights of parents act, M.”

Proudfit v. O'NEAL, 484 N.W.2d 746 (Mich. Ct. App. 1992). “95(2) (divorce act); MCL 552.452(2); MSA 25.222(2)(2) (Family Support Act); MCL 722.”

Denise R Ketchmark v. Archie L Hayman (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 552.452(4) — 2 cases

Macomb Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Anderson, 849 N.W.2d 408 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “Plaintiffs argued that, pursuant to MCL 552.452, Glambin was not required to he present at the hearing.”

Foster v. Wolkowitz, 785 N.W.2d 59 (Mich. 2010). “…“specific temporary provisions” concerning custody and parenting time pending resolution of the custody dispute. MCL 552.452(4).”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.