Change of domicile; Sole legal custody; MCL 722.31; MCR 3.211(C)(3); D’Onofrio factors; Spires v Bergman; Brecht v Hendry; Established custodial environment (ECE); Best interests; Brown v Loveman; Up-to-date information; Butters v Butters

The court held that the trial court erred by applying the change-of-domicile factors in MCL 722.31(4) where plaintiff-mother had sole legal custody of the child. Plaintiff sought to move the child’s domicile from Michigan to Texas. The trial court denied the motion after applying the D’Onofrio factors and best-interest factors. On appeal, the court held that MCL 722.31(2) controlled because it exempts cases where “the order governing the child’s custody grants sole legal custody to 1 of the child’s parents.” The court explained that, under Spires, “the language of the court rule does not require the family court to consider the D’Onofrio factors,” and MCL 722.31 “by its own language makes consideration of the D’Onofrio factors unnecessary when the relocating parent has sole legal custody.” The court also relied on Brecht, which states that “if a parent with sole legal custody wishes to move a child subject to a custody order out of this state, MCL 722.31 does not apply and the trial court may not consider the D’Onofrio factors.” But the court held that the trial court still had to determine whether the move would change the child’s ECE. If the relocation would “result in a change in parenting time so great as to necessarily change the” ECE, the trial court must then consider the best-interest factors, and plaintiff must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the move is in the child’s best interests. Reversed and remanded.