Motion to modify custody; Proper cause or change of circumstances; MCL 722.27; Vodvarka v Grasmeyer; Domestic violence; Medical care & vaccinations; Parenting-time modification; Best-interest factors; MCL 722.23; Shade v Wright

The court held that the trial court did not err in finding plaintiff-father failed to establish proper cause or a change of circumstances warranting modification of custody or in modifying parenting time without making findings on every statutory best-interest factor. The parties shared joint legal and physical custody. Plaintiff sought a custody change based primarily on concerns about defendant-mother’s former boyfriend and a medical appointment at which the child received vaccinations. Both parties also agreed their existing parenting-time schedule was not working, and the trial court changed it to alternating weeks. On appeal, the court first concluded that “plaintiff did not establish proper cause or a change of circumstances to justify a change in custody.” As to the domestic-violence concerns, although “an act of domestic violence may have occurred in the past with defendant’s boyfriend,” plaintiff did not show “that defendant’s associates posed an ongoing concern likely to affect the child,” particularly because the relationship had ended. The medical issue likewise did not justify reopening custody. Defendant followed the child’s medical provider’s recommendations, notified plaintiff of the appointment, and gave him an opportunity to attend. Further, plaintiff “failed to show that there was an agreement between the parties about the vaccines’ timing.” Thus, defendant’s conduct was “at most a minor allegation of contempt, not a sufficient disagreement to warrant revisiting custody and the child’s best interests.” The court also rejected plaintiff’s challenge to the parenting-time modification. It explained that “‘[c]ustody decisions require findings under all of the best interest factors, but parenting time decisions may be made with findings on only the contested issues.’” Because the new schedule “‘did not significantly alter the number of . . . parenting time days,’” it did not constitute a custody change requiring findings on every MCL 722.23 factor. Affirmed.