PROBATE CODE OF 1939
Act 288 of 1939
712.11 Blood or tissue typing or DNA identification profiling; presumption; costs; dismissal of custody petition.
Sec. 11.
(1) In a petition for custody filed under this chapter, the court shall order the child and each party claiming paternity to submit to blood or tissue typing determinations or DNA identification profiling, as described in section 16 of the paternity act, 1958 PA 205, MCL 722.716.
(2) Unless the birth was witnessed by the emergency service provider and sufficient documentation exists to support maternity, in a petition for custody filed under this chapter, the court shall order the child and each party claiming maternity to submit to blood or tissue typing determinations or DNA identification profiling, as described in section 16 of the paternity act, 1958 PA 205, MCL 722.716.
(3) If the probability of paternity or maternity determined by the blood or tissue typing or DNA identification profiling is 99% or higher and the DNA identification profile and summary report are admissible, paternity or maternity is presumed and the petitioner may move for summary disposition on the issue of paternity or maternity.
(4) The court may order the petitioner to pay all or part of the cost of the paternity or maternity testing.
(5) If the result of the paternity or maternity testing is admissible and establishes that the petitioner could not be the parent of the newborn, the court shall dismiss the petition for custody.
History: Add. 2000, Act 232, Eff. Jan. 1, 2001 ;-- Am. 2006, Act 488, Eff. Jan. 1, 2007
Compiler's Notes:
Enacting section 1 of Act 232 of 2000 provides:
“Enacting section 1. Section 19b of chapter XIIA of the probate code of 1939, 1939 PA 288, MCL 712A.19b, as amended by this amendatory act, and chapter XII of the probate code of 1939, 1939 PA 288, as added by this amendatory act, do not apply to a proceeding that arises before the effective date of this amendatory act.”
PopularName Notes:
Baby Abandonment
PopularName Notes:
Baby Drop Off
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
6
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 2018–2021 · leading case:
In re Minors, 912 N.W.2d 872 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
In re Minors, 912 N.W.2d 872 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 4× “17, and requires a party claiming paternity to submit to DNA testing, MCL 712.11(1). Therefore the parental rights at issue in a surrender proceeding concern the biological father.”
in Re Miller Minors (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 4× “The Safe Delivery of Newborns Law refers to the “nonsurrendering parent” in the singular, MCL 712.”
in Re Miller Minors (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 4× “The Safe Delivery of Newborns Law refers to the “nonsurrendering parent” in the singular, MCL 712.”
in Re Baby Boy Doe (Mich. Ct. App. 2021).
· cites it 2× “10(3), MCL 712.11(1), MCL 712.11(2), MCL 712.17(3).”
in Re Baby Boy Doe (Mich. Ct. App. 2021).
· cites it 2× “10(1), he would have been required to submit to a DNA test to determine paternity, see MCL 712.11(1). If the testing established that he was not the children’s biological father, the trial court would have dismissed his petition for custody.”
Kyresha Lefever v. Lanesha Matthews (Mich. Ct. App. 2021).
“” MCL 712.11(2). Thus, it appears that the act only contemplates scenarios when a birth mother is also the genetic mother, and is uninformative as to the statutory construction of the CCA in this case.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 712.11(1) — 5 cases
In re Minors, 912 N.W.2d 872 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
“17, and requires a party claiming paternity to submit to DNA testing, MCL 712.11(1). Therefore the parental rights at issue in a surrender proceeding concern the biological father.”
in Re Miller Minors (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
“The Safe Delivery of Newborns Law refers to the “nonsurrendering parent” in the singular, MCL 712.”
in Re Miller Minors (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
“The Safe Delivery of Newborns Law refers to the “nonsurrendering parent” in the singular, MCL 712.”
in Re Baby Boy Doe (Mich. Ct. App. 2021).
“10(3), MCL 712.11(1), MCL 712.11(2), MCL 712.17(3).”
in Re Baby Boy Doe (Mich. Ct. App. 2021).
“10(1), he would have been required to submit to a DNA test to determine paternity, see MCL 712.11(1). If the testing established that he was not the children’s biological father, the trial court would have dismissed his petition for custody.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 712.11(2) — 2 cases
Kyresha Lefever v. Lanesha Matthews (Mich. Ct. App. 2021).
“” MCL 712.11(2). Thus, it appears that the act only contemplates scenarios when a birth mother is also the genetic mother, and is uninformative as to the statutory construction of the CCA in this case.”
in Re Baby Boy Doe (Mich. Ct. App. 2021).
“10(3), MCL 712.11(1), MCL 712.11(2), MCL 712.17(3).”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 712.11(5) — 4 cases
In re Minors, 912 N.W.2d 872 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
“17, and requires a party claiming paternity to submit to DNA testing, MCL 712.11(1). Therefore the parental rights at issue in a surrender proceeding concern the biological father.”
in Re Miller Minors (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
“The Safe Delivery of Newborns Law refers to the “nonsurrendering parent” in the singular, MCL 712.”
in Re Miller Minors (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
“The Safe Delivery of Newborns Law refers to the “nonsurrendering parent” in the singular, MCL 712.”
in Re Baby Boy Doe (Mich. Ct. App. 2021).
“10(1), he would have been required to submit to a DNA test to determine paternity, see MCL 712.11(1). If the testing established that he was not the children’s biological father, the trial court would have dismissed his petition for custody.”
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.