Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 712B / Act 288 of 1939
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 712B.39 (2026)

Invalidation of actions; petition.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

PROBATE CODE OF 1939


Act 288 of 1939


712B.39 Invalidation of actions; petition.

Sec. 39.

    Any Indian child who is the subject of an action for foster care placement or termination of parental rights under state law, any parent or Indian custodian from whose custody an Indian child was removed, and the Indian child's tribe may petition any court of competent jurisdiction to invalidate the action upon a showing that the action violated any provision of sections 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 21, 23, 25, 27, and 29 of this chapter.

History: Add. 2012, Act 565, Imd. Eff. Jan. 2, 2013

PopularName Notes:

Probate Code
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2014–2026 · leading case: In re Beers, 926 N.W.2d 832 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In re Beers, 926 N.W.2d 832 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “3(s), is afforded protection under MIFPA is further spelled out in MCL 712B.39, which provides Any Indian child who is the subject of an action for foster care placement or termination of parental rights *663 under state law, any parent or Indian custodian from whose custody an…”
In re McCarrick, 861 N.W.2d 303 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “MCL 712B.39. Morris, 491 Mich at 122 ; In re Johnson, 305 Mich App 328, 333-334 ; 852 NW2d 224 (2014).”
In Re R E Hanning Minor (Mich. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 4× “To protect the rights of Indian children and their tribes and to help avoid delays in permanency, the Bureau of Indian Affairs regulations mandate the following: (a) State courts must ask each participant in an emergency or voluntary or involuntary child-custody proceeding…”
in Re beers/lebeau-beers Minors (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “3(s), is afforded protection under MIFPA is further spelled out in MCL 712B.39, which provides: Any Indian child who is the subject of an action for foster care placement or termination of parental rights under state law, any parent or Indian custodian from whose custody an…”
in Re beers/lebeau-beers Minors (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “3(s), is afforded protection under MIFPA is further spelled out in MCL 712B.39, which provides: Any Indian child who is the subject of an action for foster care placement or termination of parental rights under state law, any parent or Indian custodian from whose custody an…”
D in Re peters/brinton/mathews Minors (Mich. Ct. App. 2024). “” MCL 712B.39. Similar to ICWA, MIFPA requires that once a court has reason to believe the child has tribal heritage, the court must notify “the Indian child’s tribe, by registered mail with return receipt requested, of the pending child custody proceeding and of the right to…”
In Re L a Ledee Minor (Mich. Ct. App. 2026). “25 USC 1914; MCL 712B.39. Consequently, courts in other states have concluded that ICWA objections may be raised for the first time on appeal.”
in Re mccarrick/lamoreaux Minors (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “99 McCarrick does not provide any argument to support her contention that this Court should automatically reverse in this case.”
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.