Custody modification; MCL 722.27(1)(c); Stoudemire v Thomas; Best interests; MCL 722.23; Kuebler v Kuebler; Parenting time suspension; MCL 722.27a(3); Barretta v Zhitkov; Judicial bias; MCR 2.003(C); Kern v Kern-Koskela; ADA accommodation; Peden v Detroit

The court held that the trial court properly awarded plaintiff-father sole physical custody and joint legal custody but erred by suspending defendant-mother’s parenting time without the clear and convincing evidence required by statute. Plaintiff filed a paternity action while the parties lived together, and after defendant moved out the trial court found no established custodial environment and granted plaintiff temporary primary physical custody with supervised parenting time for defendant. Following additional motions, the trial court entered a final order awarding plaintiff sole physical custody, maintaining joint legal custody, and suspending defendant’s parenting time based on her failure to provide a psychological evaluation and concerns about food allergies. It also denied defendant’s motions to disqualify the judge and for ADA accommodations. On appeal, the court held that the findings on the best interest factors were supported by the record and affirmed the custody and child support rulings. On the parenting time issue, the court held that suspension was improper because the trial court made no finding that defendant’s conduct would endanger the child and quoted that suspension requires evidence showing danger to the child’s health. The court rejected defendant’s judicial bias claim because the record did not show deep seated favoritism or antagonism, and it rejected her ADA argument because she provided no documentation to support her claimed disability. Vacated in part and remanded.