Michigan Compiled Laws
Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.1011 (2026)
Repealed. 2012, Act 161, Imd. Eff. June 12, 2012.
✓ 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
722.1011 Repealed. 2012, Act 161, Imd. Eff. June 12, 2012.
Repealed. 2012, Act 161, Imd. Eff. June 12, 2012.
Compiler's Notes:
The repealed section pertained to notices included in acknowledgment of parentage form.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2006–2021 · leading case: Sinicropi v. Mazurek, 729 N.W.2d 256 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007).
Sinicropi v. Mazurek, 729 N.W.2d 256 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “” With the enactment of the revocation provision contained in MCL 722.1011 of the Acknowledgment of Parentage Act, the Legislature astutely envisioned cases in which it is discovered that the biological father is not the same individual who executed the acknowledgment of…”
Bay Cnty. Prosecutor v. Nugent, 740 N.W.2d 678 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “Plaintiff subsequently filed a complaint in the circuit court seeking to revoke *186 defendant’s acknowledgment of parentage under MCL 722.1011. The matter was transferred to the family division of the circuit court and consolidated with related actions that were pending in that…”
Helton v. Beaman, 850 N.W.2d 515 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “Before the enactment of the Revocation of Paternity Act in 2012, revocation claims were governed by § 11 of the Acknowledgment of Parentage Act, MCL 722.1011 (repealed by 2012 PA 161 ). When enacting the new Revocation of Paternity Act, the Legislature adopted much of the…”
Killingbeck v. Killingbeck, 711 N.W.2d 759 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). “MCL 722.1011 provides, in relevant part: (1) The mother or the man who signed the acknowledgment, the child who is the subject of the acknowledgment, or a prosecuting attorney may file a claim for revocation of an acknowledgment of parentage.”
Rogers v. Wcisel, 877 N.W.2d 169 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015). “Bay Co Prosecutor was decided under MCL 722.1011, which governed revoca *90 tions of paternity until it was repealed and replaced by MCL 722.”
Bay Cnty. Prosecutor v. Nugent, 740 N.W.2d 678 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “Plaintiff subsequently filed a complaint in the circuit court seeking to revoke defendant's acknowledgment of parentage under MCL 722.1011. The matter was transferred to the family division of the circuit court and consolidated with related actions that were pending in that…”
In re Moiles, 840 N.W.2d 790 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013). “at 440 ; see also Bay Co Prosecutor v Nugent, 276 Mich App 183, 190 ; 740 NW2d 678 (2007) (applying the Black’s Law Dictionary definition to define the term “mistake of fact” as used in the Acknowledgment of Parentage Act, MCL 722.1011(2)(a). Black’s Law Dictionary (9th ed).”
Sinicropi v. Mazurek, 760 N.W.2d 520 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008). “The trial court is directed to address revocation solely under MCL 722.1011(3), which requires, in part, that Mazurek prove by clear and convincing evidence that revocation of the acknowledgment of parentage is proper considering the equities of the case.”
Dillon Michael Blain v. Brittney Marie Ehlert (Mich. Ct. App. 2021). “” Bay Co Prosecutor v Nugent, 276 Mich App 183, 190 ; 740 NW2d 678 (2007) (interpreting MCL 722.1011(2), now repealed and replaced by MCL 722.”
In Re: A.N.F. (d/o/b 10/24/99), a Child Under Eighteen Years of Age (Tenn. Ct. App. 2008). “” Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.1011 (3). In applying that section in a case similar to this one, the Michigan Court of Appeals recently explained: It may well be that the Legislature, which has always been concerned chiefly with the best interests and protection of children as…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.1011(1) — 4 cases
Sinicropi v. Mazurek, 729 N.W.2d 256 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “” With the enactment of the revocation provision contained in MCL 722.1011 of the Acknowledgment of Parentage Act, the Legislature astutely envisioned cases in which it is discovered that the biological father is not the same individual who executed the acknowledgment of…”
Bay Cnty. Prosecutor v. Nugent, 740 N.W.2d 678 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “Plaintiff subsequently filed a complaint in the circuit court seeking to revoke *186 defendant’s acknowledgment of parentage under MCL 722.1011. The matter was transferred to the family division of the circuit court and consolidated with related actions that were pending in that…”
Helton v. Beaman, 850 N.W.2d 515 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “Before the enactment of the Revocation of Paternity Act in 2012, revocation claims were governed by § 11 of the Acknowledgment of Parentage Act, MCL 722.1011 (repealed by 2012 PA 161 ). When enacting the new Revocation of Paternity Act, the Legislature adopted much of the…”
Bay Cnty. Prosecutor v. Nugent, 740 N.W.2d 678 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “Plaintiff subsequently filed a complaint in the circuit court seeking to revoke defendant's acknowledgment of parentage under MCL 722.1011. The matter was transferred to the family division of the circuit court and consolidated with related actions that were pending in that…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.1011(2) — 3 cases
Sinicropi v. Mazurek, 729 N.W.2d 256 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “” With the enactment of the revocation provision contained in MCL 722.1011 of the Acknowledgment of Parentage Act, the Legislature astutely envisioned cases in which it is discovered that the biological father is not the same individual who executed the acknowledgment of…”
Helton v. Beaman, 850 N.W.2d 515 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “Before the enactment of the Revocation of Paternity Act in 2012, revocation claims were governed by § 11 of the Acknowledgment of Parentage Act, MCL 722.1011 (repealed by 2012 PA 161 ). When enacting the new Revocation of Paternity Act, the Legislature adopted much of the…”
Dillon Michael Blain v. Brittney Marie Ehlert (Mich. Ct. App. 2021). “” Bay Co Prosecutor v Nugent, 276 Mich App 183, 190 ; 740 NW2d 678 (2007) (interpreting MCL 722.1011(2), now repealed and replaced by MCL 722.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.1011(2)(a) — 3 cases
Bay Cnty. Prosecutor v. Nugent, 740 N.W.2d 678 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “Plaintiff subsequently filed a complaint in the circuit court seeking to revoke *186 defendant’s acknowledgment of parentage under MCL 722.1011. The matter was transferred to the family division of the circuit court and consolidated with related actions that were pending in that…”
In re Moiles, 840 N.W.2d 790 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013). “at 440 ; see also Bay Co Prosecutor v Nugent, 276 Mich App 183, 190 ; 740 NW2d 678 (2007) (applying the Black’s Law Dictionary definition to define the term “mistake of fact” as used in the Acknowledgment of Parentage Act, MCL 722.1011(2)(a). Black’s Law Dictionary (9th ed).”
Bay Cnty. Prosecutor v. Nugent, 740 N.W.2d 678 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “Plaintiff subsequently filed a complaint in the circuit court seeking to revoke defendant's acknowledgment of parentage under MCL 722.1011. The matter was transferred to the family division of the circuit court and consolidated with related actions that were pending in that…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.1011(3) — 6 cases
Sinicropi v. Mazurek, 729 N.W.2d 256 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “” With the enactment of the revocation provision contained in MCL 722.1011 of the Acknowledgment of Parentage Act, the Legislature astutely envisioned cases in which it is discovered that the biological father is not the same individual who executed the acknowledgment of…”
Helton v. Beaman, 850 N.W.2d 515 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “Before the enactment of the Revocation of Paternity Act in 2012, revocation claims were governed by § 11 of the Acknowledgment of Parentage Act, MCL 722.1011 (repealed by 2012 PA 161 ). When enacting the new Revocation of Paternity Act, the Legislature adopted much of the…”
Bay Cnty. Prosecutor v. Nugent, 740 N.W.2d 678 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “Plaintiff subsequently filed a complaint in the circuit court seeking to revoke *186 defendant’s acknowledgment of parentage under MCL 722.1011. The matter was transferred to the family division of the circuit court and consolidated with related actions that were pending in that…”
Killingbeck v. Killingbeck, 711 N.W.2d 759 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). “MCL 722.1011 provides, in relevant part: (1) The mother or the man who signed the acknowledgment, the child who is the subject of the acknowledgment, or a prosecuting attorney may file a claim for revocation of an acknowledgment of parentage.”
Bay Cnty. Prosecutor v. Nugent, 740 N.W.2d 678 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “Plaintiff subsequently filed a complaint in the circuit court seeking to revoke defendant's acknowledgment of parentage under MCL 722.1011. The matter was transferred to the family division of the circuit court and consolidated with related actions that were pending in that…”
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.