Opinion
Nos. 104815, 104816, 104859, 104860.
March 29, 1996.
Leave to Appeal Denied March 29, 1996:
reported below: 214 Mich. App. 95.
I would have this Court monitor, or have the Court of Appeals monitor, the future course of the custody issue.
The Court of Appeals, constrained by this Court's unfortunate decisions in Ruppel v Lesner, 421 Mich. 559 (1984), Bowie v Arder, 441 Mich. 23 (1992), and In re Clausen, 442 Mich. 648 (1993), concluded that Carol Porter does not have standing, but added: "Our ruling has no effect whatsoever on Carol Porter's standing if she is successful in her attempts to be appointed guardian of the minor children." 214 Mich. App. 95, 105 (1995). That petition is still pending. It is ultimately this Court's responsibility and that of the Court of Appeals to assure that no injustice is done the children as a result of the artificial standing rules set forth in Ruppel, Bowie, and Clausen.