Child custody; Parenting time; Proper cause or change of circumstances; Vodvarka v Grasmeyer; Established custodial environment (ECE); MCL 722.27(1)(c); Lieberman v Orr; Parenting time modification; Shade v Wright; Referee hearing review; MCL 552.507(4); MCR 3.215(F)(2); Operating while intoxicated (OWI)

The court held that plaintiff-mother failed to show “proper cause” or a “change of circumstances” with “a significant effect on the child’s well-being,” and that the trial court did not err in applying Vodvarka to deny requested custody and parenting-time changes. Plaintiff-mother moved to modify custody, parenting time, and support after learning defendant-father had been arrested for cocaine possession and was convicted of OWI and use of a controlled substance, but he presented evidence that he was “participating in monitoring and treatment through sobriety court” and remained compliant. On appeal, the court affirmed the custody ruling because the trial court’s findings did not “clearly preponderate in the opposite direction,” and plaintiff did not introduce evidence showing the substance-abuse issues or brief incarcerations “had or could have a significant effect on the child’s life,” where she testified the child was improving in school and speech therapy. It also held the trial court could review the referee record, including video, because MCR 3.215(F)(2) permits review of the referee hearing record when the parties have an opportunity to present live evidence, and plaintiff did not object despite notice. As to parenting time, the court held the trial court correctly applied the Vodvarka framework because plaintiff sought “limited, supervised parenting time” at the paternal grandmother’s home, a reduction and change in setting that would alter the ECE, making the proper-cause or change of circumstances standard applicable. Affirmed.