Court Opinion

ID: 9851173
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 05:08:29.912541+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:20:50.496004
License: Public Domain

R. M. Maher, J.
Judge Kelly’s dissent adequately treats the issue that is properly before this Court. The probate court lacked jurisdiction to revoke the release under MCLA 710.29(9); MSA 27.3178(555.29X9), and did not abuse the discretion *221granted it under MCLA 710.64(1); MSA 27.3178(555.64)(1).
It is inappropriate to remand this matter to investigate the "critical issue” of whether this infant’s mother was told, prior to executing the release, that she had 20 days to change her mind. Had this issue been raised before the probate court, a swift resolution would have followed. Instead, the allegation that the mother was under a misapprehension of the consequences of her release did not surface until oral arguments before this Court. The legislative determination that finality in these matters is beneficial to the well-being of the children involved coincides with the judicial policy of not considering matters first raised on appeal.
Affirmed.
J. H. Gillis, J., concurred.