PROBATE CODE OF 1939
Act 288 of 1939
712.2 Newborn surrendered to emergency service provider; court jurisdiction; effect of other provisions of law; immunity from civil action.
Sec. 2.
(1) The court has jurisdiction over a newborn who is surrendered to an emergency service provider as provided in section 3 of this chapter. The court may appoint a lawyer-guardian ad litem to represent a newborn in proceedings under this chapter.
(2) Except as provided in section 5 of this chapter, the reporting requirement of section 3 of the child protection law, 1975 PA 238, MCL 722.623, does not apply regarding a child surrendered to an emergency service provider as provided in section 3 of this chapter.
(3) Unless this chapter specifically provides otherwise, a provision in another chapter of this act does not apply to a proceeding under this chapter. Unless this chapter specifically provides otherwise, the child custody act of 1970, 1970 PA 91, MCL 722.21 to 722.30, does not apply to a proceeding under this chapter.
(4) A hospital and a child placing agency, and their agents and employees, are immune in a civil action for damages for an act or omission in accepting or transferring a newborn under this chapter, except for an act or omission constituting gross negligence or willful or wanton misconduct. To the extent not protected by the immunity conferred by 1964 PA 170, MCL 691.1401 to 691.1415, an employee or contractor of a fire department or police station has the same immunity that this subsection provides to a hospital's or child placing agency's agent or employee.
History: Add. 2000 Act 232, Eff. Jan. 1, 2001
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 (
1 in the last 5 years), 1987–2021 · 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).
“MCL 712.2(3). *502 A. SAFE DELIVERY OF NEWBORNS LAW The Safe Delivery of Newborns Law "encourage[s] parents of unwanted newborns to deliver them to emergency service providers instead of abandoning them[.”
In re MGR, 916 N.W.2d 662 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
“(2) If the putative father has established a custodial relationship with the child or has provided substantial and regular support or care in accordance with the putative father's ability to provide support or care for the mother during pregnancy or for either mother or child…”
In Re Albring, 408 N.W.2d 545 (Mich. Ct. App. 1987).
“Even if, however, we had concluded that the notice deficiency deprived the probate court of jurisdiction in a matter within the continuing jurisdiction of the circuit court, MCL 712.2(b); MSA 27.3178(598.2)(b) specifically provides that the notice provision does "not apply…”
in Re Miller Minors (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
“MCL 712.2(3). A. SAFE DELIVERY OF NEWBORNS LAW The Safe Delivery of Newborns Law “encourage[s] parents of unwanted newborns to deliver them to emergency service providers instead of abandoning them[.”
in Re Miller Minors (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
“MCL 712.2(3). A. SAFE DELIVERY OF NEWBORNS LAW The Safe Delivery of Newborns Law “encourage[s] parents of unwanted newborns to deliver them to emergency service providers instead of abandoning them[.”
in Re Baby Boy Doe (Mich. Ct. App. 2021).
“Respondent responded, arguing that MCL 712.2(a)(1) provides that the adoption records are subject to strict confidentiality and only the parties to the adoption proceeding are entitled to those records.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 712.2(3) — 3 cases
In re Minors, 912 N.W.2d 872 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
“MCL 712.2(3). *502 A. SAFE DELIVERY OF NEWBORNS LAW The Safe Delivery of Newborns Law "encourage[s] parents of unwanted newborns to deliver them to emergency service providers instead of abandoning them[.”
in Re Miller Minors (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
“MCL 712.2(3). A. SAFE DELIVERY OF NEWBORNS LAW The Safe Delivery of Newborns Law “encourage[s] parents of unwanted newborns to deliver them to emergency service providers instead of abandoning them[.”
in Re Miller Minors (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
“MCL 712.2(3). A. SAFE DELIVERY OF NEWBORNS LAW The Safe Delivery of Newborns Law “encourage[s] parents of unwanted newborns to deliver them to emergency service providers instead of abandoning them[.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 712.2(a)(1) — 1 case
in Re Baby Boy Doe (Mich. Ct. App. 2021).
“Respondent responded, arguing that MCL 712.2(a)(1) provides that the adoption records are subject to strict confidentiality and only the parties to the adoption proceeding are entitled to those records.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 712.2(b) — 1 case
In Re Albring, 408 N.W.2d 545 (Mich. Ct. App. 1987).
“Even if, however, we had concluded that the notice deficiency deprived the probate court of jurisdiction in a matter within the continuing jurisdiction of the circuit court, MCL 712.2(b); MSA 27.3178(598.2)(b) specifically provides that the notice provision does "not apply…”
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.