Guardianship; Conservatorship; Legally incapacitated individual; Estates & Protected Individuals Code (EPIC); Removal of guardian; MCL 700.5310; MCL 700.5306(1); Appointment of a guardian ad litem; MCL 700.5303(3); MCL 700.5306a(1)(e) & (x); Removal of conservator; Good cause; MCL 700.5414; Fiduciary duties; MCL 700.1212(1); MCL 700.5416; Change of venue; Forum-shopping; In re Guardianship of Redd

The court held that the probate court abused its discretion by removing appellant-Guardian Care as guardian sua sponte and by removing appellant as conservator without identifying good cause. Appellant had served as guardian for the legally incapacitated individual for more than 15 years and later as conservator, then moved to change venue after the ward relocated to Macomb County. The probate court treated the venue motion as forum-shopping, initiated review on its own, removed appellant as guardian and conservator, and appointed appellee as successor fiduciary. On appeal, the court held that EPIC did not authorize the probate court to remove the guardian sua sponte, explaining that “the probate court abused its discretion by sua sponte removing Guardian Care without the filing of a petition.” The court also held that the probate court failed to support removal under the governing suitability standard because it “failed to adequately explain how Guardian Care’s conduct in this case warranted Guardian Care’s removal as guardian.” As to the conservatorship, the court held that the probate court also abused its discretion because it “omitted any discussion of the conservatorship or ‘good cause’ standard,” and the record contained “no meaningful evidence of problematic conduct by Guardian Care.” Reversed and remanded.