Opinion
357828
08-17-2021
Meghan Marie Kuebler v. Paul Andrew Kuebler
LC No. 15-002753-DM
Jane M. Beckering, James Robert Redford, JudgesORDER
Jane E. Markey, Presiding Judge
The motion to seal or otherwise keep two exhibits confidential is DENIED.
The trial court erred when it granted plaintiff overnight parenting-time visits in the July 14, 2021 order. It did not follow the established procedure for modifying parenting time. See Shade v Wright, 291 Mich.App. 17, 22-23, 28-32; 805 N.W.2d 1 (2010). The July 14, 2021 order is therefore VACATED. The motion for stay of proceedings is DENIED.
Pursuant to MCR 7.205(E)(2), the Court orders the trial court to conclude the evidentiary hearing on plaintiffs motion to modify custody and parenting time within 21 days from the date of the clerk's certification of this order. The trial court shall then issue a decision on plaintiffs motion within 21 days. The trial court shall not enter an order modifying the custody and parenting-time provisions in the consent judgment of divorce unless it determines that plaintiff has established proper cause or change of circumstances, see MCL 722.27(1)(c); Lieberman v Orr, 319 Mich.App. 68, 81; 900 N.W.2d 130 (2017), and it determines that the modification is in the children's best interests, Shade, 291 Mich.App. at 23. The trial court must make findings regarding whether any modification would change the children's established custodial environment. If the modification would change the children's established custodial environment, the proper cause and change of circumstances standard set forth in Vodvarka v Grasmeyer, 259 Mich.App. 499; 675 N.W.2d 847 (2003), applies, Kaeb v Kaeb, 309 Mich.App. 556, 570; 873 N.W.2d 319 (2015), and clear and convincing evidence must show that the modification is in the children's best interests, Shade, 291 Mich.App. at 23. If the modification is limited to a change to the duration or frequency of parenting time, the less stringent proper cause and change of circumstances standard set forth in Shade applies, Kaeb, 309 Mich.App. at 570, and a preponderance of the evidence must show that the modification is in the children's best interests, Shade, 291 Mich.App. at 23. The trial court shall not, on its own motion or by stipulation of the parties, extend the time frames provided in this order.