Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.720 (2026)

Continuing jurisdiction; purposes.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

THE PATERNITY ACT

Act 205 of 1956

722.720 Continuing jurisdiction; purposes.

Sec. 10.

The court has continuing jurisdiction over proceedings brought under this act to do any of the following:

(a) Increase or decrease the amount fixed by the order of filiation subject to section 7.

(b) Provide for, change, and enforce provisions of the order of filiation relating to the custody or support of or parenting time with the child.

History: 1956, Act 205, Eff. Aug. 11, 1956 ;-- Am. 1986, Act 107, Eff. June 1, 1986 ;-- Am. 1990, Act 244, Imd. Eff. Oct. 10, 1990 ;-- Am. 1990, Act 294, Imd. Eff. Dec. 14, 1990 ;-- Am. 1994, Act 388, Imd. Eff. Dec. 29, 1994 ;-- Am. 1996, Act 18, Eff. June 1, 1996 ;-- Am. 2001, Act 109, Eff. Sept. 30, 2001 ;-- Am. 2012, Act 162, Imd. Eff. June 12, 2012

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 18 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1976–2025 · leading case: Crego v. Coleman, 615 N.W.2d 218 (Mich. 2000).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Crego v. Coleman, 615 N.W.2d 218 (Mich. 2000). · cites it 4× “§ 722.720; MSA 25.500. Finally, where the parties to a paternity action have reached an agreement regarding child support, that agreement is modifiable as long as the support order includes language allowing modification.”

Crego v. Coleman, 591 N.W.2d 277 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “493, provides as follows: (a) An agreement or compromise made by the mother or child or by some authorized person on their behalf with the father concerning the support and education of the child shall be binding upon the mother and the child only when the court having…”

Morrison v. Richerson, 497 N.W.2d 506 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “” MCL 722.720; MSA 25.500. The friend of the court is an employee of the circuit court in the judicial circuit it serves.”

MacOmb Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Westerman, 645 N.W.2d 710 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002). “MCL 722.720. According to the consent judgment, defendant acknowledged paternity before the circuit court at the time of the parties’ settlement agreement.”

Hisaw v. Hayes, 350 N.W.2d 302 (Mich. Ct. App. 1984). “MCL 722.720; MSA 25.500 gives the circuit court continuing jurisdiction over support and custody, but only until its judgment has been completely satisfied.”

Syrkowski v. Appleyard, 362 N.W.2d 211 (Mich. 1985). “As regards custody, see MCL 722.720; MSA 25.500 and the Child Custody Act of 1970, 1970 PA 91 , MCL 722.”

In Re Smne, 689 N.W.2d 235 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). “17; MCL 722.720; Kosch v Kosch, 233 Mich App 346, 350 ; 592 NW2d 434 (1999).”

Van Laar v. Rozema, 288 N.W.2d 667 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). “Boyles v Brown, 69 Mich App 480 ; 245 NW2d 100 (1976), MCL 722.720; MSA 25.500, Ebel v Brown, 70 Mich App 705, 709 ; 246 NW2d 379 (1976).”

Boyles v. Brown, 245 N.W.2d 100 (Mich. Ct. App. 1976). “” MCLA 722.720; MSA 25.500. An amendment to § 10, 1971 PA 118 , § 1, further manifests a legislative intent that the court possess not only a power to modify support orders but a responsibility to oversee the needs of the illegitimate during his minority.”

In Re Newton, 606 N.W.2d 34 (Mich. Ct. App. 2000). “MCL 722.720; MSA 25.500, MCL 552.17; MSA 25.”

Crego v. Coleman, 573 N.W.2d 291 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998). “4 We recognize that MCL 722.720; MSA 25.500 allows children bom out of wedlock to, in some circumstances, petition the court for a change in support on the basis of a change in circumstances.”

Bessmertnaja v. Schwager, 477 N.W.2d 126 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991). “Under MCL 722.720; MSA 25.500, the court has continuing jurisdiction over paternity proceedings to increase or decrease the amount of support, to provide for reasonable visitation, and to change the custody of the child.”

Show all 18 citing cases →

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.720(1) — 2 cases

Crego v. Coleman, 615 N.W.2d 218 (Mich. 2000). “§ 722.720; MSA 25.500. Finally, where the parties to a paternity action have reached an agreement regarding child support, that agreement is modifiable as long as the support order includes language allowing modification.”

Morrison v. Richerson, 497 N.W.2d 506 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993). “” MCL 722.720; MSA 25.500. The friend of the court is an employee of the circuit court in the judicial circuit it serves.”

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.720(a) — 1 case

Bonnie M Parks v. John D Niemiec, 926 N.W.2d 297 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.720(b) — 1 case

20250225_C370622_39_370622.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).

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.