Court Opinion

ID: 9697290
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 19:11:23.538068+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:30.851135
License: Public Domain

Holbrook, Jr, P.J.
(dissenting.) I dissent. Remanding this matter for a new trial before a different judge is unwarranted given that appellant has not requested this extraordinary (and expensive) relief and, further, that the trial judge handled the matter in a reasonable manner in light of the embarrassing and outrageous conduct of both parents.
Contrary to the majority’s holding, the parties’ stipulation was not a stipulation of fact, but rather an express attempt to limit the trial court’s ability to determine the best interests of the child. In deciding a custody dispute, the court’s primary concern must be the best interests of the child, not the parents. MCL 722.25; MSA 25.312(5). The enumerated factors in MCL 722.23; MSA 25.312(3) must be “considered, evaluated, and determined by the court” (emphasis added), not the parties. This Court has held repeatedly that a trial court is not bound by the parties’ stipulations or agreements regarding child custody where such stipulation or agreement would usurp its ability to consider all the enumerated statutory factors that encompass the determination of the best interests of the child. See Napora v Napora, 159 Mich App 241, 245; 406 NW2d 197 (1986); Lombardo v Lombardo, 202 Mich App 151, 160; 507 NW2d 788 (1993); Williamson v Williamson, 122 Mich App 667, 672; 333 NW2d 6 (1982). See also West v West, 241 Mich 679, 683-684; 217 NW 924 (1928); Ebel v Brown, 70 Mich App 705, 709; 246 NW2d 379 (1976). Here, the court *644could not completely disregard the child’s school environment, a factor particularly important in determining the best interests of the child because of its focus on the child, rather than on the parents. This is especially true where the parties in this case were essentially, equal in their ability and willingness to be good parents. I would hold that the court did not commit legal error, and I would affirm its disposition of this matter.