Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.28 (2026)

Child custody disputes; appeal, grounds.

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

CHILD CUSTODY ACT OF 1970


Act 91 of 1970


722.28 Child custody disputes; appeal, grounds.

Sec. 8.

    To expedite the resolution of a child custody dispute by prompt and final adjudication, all orders and judgments of the circuit court shall be affirmed on appeal unless the trial judge made findings of fact against the great weight of evidence or committed a palpable abuse of discretion or a clear legal error on a major issue.

History: 1970, Act 91, Eff. Apr. 1, 1971

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 440 cases (162 in the last 5 years), 1971–2026 · leading case: Berger v. Berger, 747 N.W.2d 336 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008).
Berger v. Berger, 747 N.W.2d 336 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 9× “MCL 722.28; Fletcher v Fletcher, 447 Mich 871, 876-877 (BRICKLEY, J.”
Pierron v. Pierron, 765 N.W.2d 345 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 12× “The Pierron children shall remain enrolled in the Grosse Pointe school system until further order of the Court.”
Fletcher v. Fletcher, 526 N.W.2d 889 (Mich. 1994). · cites it 12× “[MCL 722.28; MSA 25.312(8).] By its terms, § 8 distinguishes among three types of findings and assigns standards of review to each.”
Pierron v. Pierron, 782 N.W.2d 480 (Mich. 2010). · cites it 6× “" MCL 722.28. Under this standard, a reviewing court should not substitute its judgment on questions of fact unless the factual determination "`clearly preponderate[s] in the opposite direction.”
Shulick v. Richards, 729 N.W.2d 533 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 5× “MCL 722.28 provides: To expedite the resolution of a child custody dispute by prompt and final adjudication, all orders and judgments of the circuit court shall be affirmed on appeal unless the trial judge made findings of fact against the great weight of evidence or committed a…”
Mitchell v. Mitchell, 823 N.W.2d 153 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 3× “Defendant first argues that the trial court did not establish proper cause or a change of circumstances in a separate proceeding before the hearing to modify custody.”
Jason Andrew Griffin v. Rebekah Marie Griffin, 916 N.W.2d 292 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “Further, pursuant to MCL 722.28, questions of law in custody cases are reviewed for clear legal error.”
Diez v. Davey, 861 N.W.2d 323 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 4× “Apart from these more general criticisms of the trial court’s rulings, plaintiff challenges the trial court’s findings regarding several best interests factors, specifically, factors (b), (d), (f), (h), and (l).”
Sinicropi v. Mazurek, 729 N.W.2d 256 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “’ ” Vodvarka v Grasmeyer, 259 Mich App 499, 507 ; 675 NW2d 847 (2003) (citation omitted); Fletcher v Fletcher, 229 Mich App 19, 24 ; 581 NW2d 11 (1998), citing MCL 722.28. In reviewing the findings, this Court defers to the trial court’s determination of credibility.”
Demski v. Petlick, 873 N.W.2d 596 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “All orders and judgments of the circuit court regarding child custody and parenting time are to be affirmed unless the trial court made findings of fact against the great weight of the evidence or committed a palpable abuse of discretion or a clear legal error on a major issue.”
Wilkins v. Wilkins, 386 N.W.2d 677 (Mich. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 6× “" MCL 722.28; MSA 25.312(8). Our review of the records indicates that the trial court carefully considered all of the above factors of § 3.”
McIntosh v. McIntosh, 768 N.W.2d 325 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “Second, a trial court commits clear legal error under MCL 722.28 when it incorrectly chooses, interprets, or applies the law.”
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.