Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 722 / Act 305 of 1996
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.1004 (2026)

Acknowledgment as basis for court ordered child support, custody, or parenting time; relationship and status of child.

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

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF PARENTAGE ACT


Act 305 of 1996


722.1004 Acknowledgment as basis for court ordered child support, custody, or parenting time; relationship and status of child.

Sec. 4.

    An acknowledgment that complies with this act and is filed with the state registrar establishes parentage and is the equivalent to an adjudication of parentage of the child and confers on the acknowledged parent all rights and duties of a parent, and the acknowledgment may be the basis for court ordered child support, custody, or parenting time without further adjudication under the paternity act, 1956 PA 205, MCL 722.711 to 722.730, or under the assisted reproduction and surrogacy parentage act. The child who is the subject of the acknowledgment bears the same relationship to the birth parent and the acknowledged parent as a child born or conceived during a marriage and has the identical status, rights, and duties of a child born in lawful wedlock effective from birth.

    

    

History: 1996, Act 305, Eff. June 1, 1997 ;-- Am. 2024, Act 31, Eff. Apr. 2, 2025

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 27 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1998–2025 · leading case: Sinicropi v. Mazurek, 729 N.W.2d 256 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Sinicropi v. Mazurek, 729 N.W.2d 256 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 9× “1003 and MCL 722.1004, an unrevoked acknowledgment already legally established paternity and conferred the status of natural and legal father on the man executing the acknowledgment, which in turn entitled him to seek custody or parenting time if desired and obligated him to pay…”
Crego v. Coleman, 615 N.W.2d 218 (Mich. 2000). · cites it 6× “[MCL 722.1004; MSA 25.604.] Except as otherwise provided by law, a mother and father who sign an acknowledgment that is filed as prescribed in section 5 are consenting to the general, personal jurisdiction of the courts of record of this state regarding the issues of the…”
Killingbeck v. Killingbeck, 711 N.W.2d 759 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 8× “" MCL 722.1004. The acknowledgment "may be the basis for court ordered.”
In Re Mary G., 59 Cal. Rptr. 3d 703 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 3× “, the Legislature declared that there was a compelling state interest in establishing paternity for all children, with the goal of providing children with support awards and with equal access to benefits such as Social Security, health insurance, and inheritance rights, and…”
Aichele v. Hodge, 673 N.W.2d 452 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 4× “The child who is the subject of the acknowledgment shall bear the same relationship to the mother and the man signing as the father as a child born or conceived during a marriage and shall have the identical status, rights, and duties of a child born in lawful wedlock effective…”
In Re Rood, 763 N.W.2d 587 (Mich. 2009). · cites it 2× “" MCL 722.1004. Accordingly, respondent's status is that of a legal, not a putative, father.”
Eldred v. Ziny, 631 N.W.2d 748 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 3× “Ziny’s claim to the full rights of a father whose child is bom in wedlock appears to be premised on § 4 of the Acknowledgment of Parentage Act, MCL 722.1004. A plain reading of § 4 reveals that, contrary to Mr.”
Bay Cnty. Prosecutor v. Nugent, 740 N.W.2d 678 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 3× “[MCL 722.1004.] There is no dispute that Dyjak and defendant executed the acknowledgment of parentage consistently with the requirements of the APA.”
Kaiser v. Schreiber, 670 N.W.2d 697 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 6× “Defendant noted that plaintiff could not produce a notarized acknowledgement of paternity or a valid order of filiation, and therefore was a third party who was not entitled to bring an action for custody under M.”
Sims v. Verbrugge, 911 N.W.2d 233 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 3× “The child who is the subject of the acknowledgment shall bear the same relationship to the mother and the man signing as the father as a child born or conceived during a marriage and shall have the identical status, rights, and duties of a child born in lawful wedlock effective…”
In re Moiles, 840 N.W.2d 790 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 3× “In addition, the trial court did not err when it determined that it was not required to make a best-interests determination under MCL 722.”
Helton v. Beaman, 850 N.W.2d 515 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “MCL 722.1004. Once the acknowledgment of parentage is complete, the child has “the identical status, rights, and duties of a child born in lawful wedlock effective from birth.”
Show all 27 citing cases →
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.