REVOCATION OF PARENTAGE ACT
Act 159 of 2012
722.1439 Motion to set aside determination.
Sec. 9.
(1) If a child has an affiliated father and paternity was determined based on the affiliated father's failure to participate in the court proceedings, the mother, an alleged father, or the affiliated father may file a motion with the court that made the determination to set aside the determination.
(2) A motion under this section must be filed within 3 years after the child's birth or within 1 year after the date of the order of filiation, whichever is later. The requirement that an action be filed within 3 years after the child's birth or within 1 year after the date of the order of filiation does not apply to an action filed on or before 1 year after the effective date of this act.
(3) If the court determines that a motion under this section should be denied and the order of filiation not be set aside, the court shall order the person who filed the motion to pay the reasonable attorney fees and costs incurred by any other party because of the motion.
History: 2012, Act 159, Imd. Eff. June 12, 2012 ;-- Am. 2024, Act 29, Eff. Apr. 2, 2025
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
6
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 2013–2022 · leading case:
Adler v. Dormio, 872 N.W.2d 721 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
Adler v. Dormio, 872 N.W.2d 721 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 4× “Typically, a motion under MCL 722.1439 must be filed within 3 years after the child’s birth or one year of the order of filiation, whichever is later.”
Glaubius v. Glaubius, 855 N.W.2d 221 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 3× “1433(5), if the affiliated father did not participate in the proceedings establishing his paternity. Notably, however, no express provision is made for setting aside an order establishing a man as an affiliated father when the man participated in the court proceedings…”
Helton v. Beaman, 850 N.W.2d 515 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
“(2) Section 9, MCL 722.1439, governs an action to set aside an order of filiation.”
In re Daniels Est., 837 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013).
“1437, or an order of filiation, MCL 722.1439. It also governs actions to determine that a *459 presumed father is not a child’s father, MCL 722.”
In Re williams-blair/cross Minors (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 2× “1435(3); MCL 722.1439. And we question whether the criteria in those statutory provisions were satisfied when in 2020 the trial court vacated the 2012 orders and acknowledgements.”
Olivia Fay Dennis v. Steve Tyler (Mich. 2018).
“” MCL 722.1439(1). Because defendant here participated in the proceedings, if he were an parties had had one child, that referred to the parties as mother and father, and that provided for child custody and visitation.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.1439(1) — 3 cases
Glaubius v. Glaubius, 855 N.W.2d 221 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
“1433(5), if the affiliated father did not participate in the proceedings establishing his paternity. Notably, however, no express provision is made for setting aside an order establishing a man as an affiliated father when the man participated in the court proceedings…”
Adler v. Dormio, 872 N.W.2d 721 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
“Typically, a motion under MCL 722.1439 must be filed within 3 years after the child’s birth or one year of the order of filiation, whichever is later.”
Olivia Fay Dennis v. Steve Tyler (Mich. 2018).
“” MCL 722.1439(1). Because defendant here participated in the proceedings, if he were an parties had had one child, that referred to the parties as mother and father, and that provided for child custody and visitation.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.1439(2) — 2 cases
Adler v. Dormio, 872 N.W.2d 721 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
“Typically, a motion under MCL 722.1439 must be filed within 3 years after the child’s birth or one year of the order of filiation, whichever is later.”
In Re williams-blair/cross Minors (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).
“1435(3); MCL 722.1439. And we question whether the criteria in those statutory provisions were satisfied when in 2020 the trial court vacated the 2012 orders and acknowledgements.”
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.