The Michigan Court of Appeals is publishing Thompson v. Thompson (Case No. 250504; March 23, 2004). The court held that the trial court correctly admitted testimony at trial of events and incidents that occurred before entry of the order granting temporary custody to plaintiff.
The panel writes (excerpt):
Apparently, plaintiff is contending that when a party stipulates to a temporary custody order, he or she is no longer entitled to a full evidentiary hearing on the best interests factors. Plaintiff’s argument is without merit, as it would preclude the trial court from hearing all relevant evidence from which to make factual findings regarding the best interest factors based on a temporary custody agreement. By definition, a temporary custody agreement is only a temporary order pending further proceedings. Defendant may not be denied a full evidentiary hearing just because she stipulates with regard to “temporary custody.” Therefore, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiff’s motion to limit testimony to those events that occurred after entry of the temporary custody order.
Plaintiff’s second issue on appeal is whether it was error for the trial court to change custody of the children from plaintiff to defendant without requiring defendant to show a change of circumstances or proper cause after the trial court found that plaintiff had established a custodial environment for the children. Because this was a temporary custody order, we disagree.