Order Michigan Supreme Court
Lansing, Michigan
December 16, 2009 Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice
139872 Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver
Maura D. Corrigan
Robert P. Young, Jr.
LEAH ROSE FOSTER, Stephen J. Markman
Plaintiff-Appellee, Diane M. Hathaway,
Justices
v SC: 139872
COA: 291825
Monroe Circuit Court Family
DAVID KENNETH WOLKOWITZ, Division: 08-002771-DP
Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________________________/
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 15, 2009
judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is GRANTED. The parties shall
include among the issues to be briefed: (1) whether the Court of Appeals erred in relying
on the Michigan Acknowledgment of Parentage Act (MAPA), MCL 722.1001 et seq.,
rather than the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA),
MCL 722.1101 et seq., to determine that Michigan should exercise subject-matter
jurisdiction in this interstate child custody dispute; (2) if the Court of Appeals correctly
relied on the MAPA to establish subject-matter jurisdiction in Michigan, whether the
statute violates the Equal Protection Clauses of the state and federal constitutions by
creating a suspect classification of unmarried fathers who are treated differently than
married fathers; and (3) if jurisdiction properly lies in Illinois, as the child’s “home state”
under the UCCJEA, MCL 722.1102(g), MCL 722.1201(1), whether Michigan is the more
convenient forum for resolution of this matter. See MCL 722.1202(2); MCL 722.1207.
The Clerk of the Court is directed to place this case on the March 2010 session
calendar for argument and submission. Appellant’s brief and appendix must be filed no
later than January 29, 2010, and appellee’s brief and appendix, if appellee chooses to
submit an appendix, must be filed no later than February 19, 2010.
The State Bar Family Law Section is invited to file a brief amicus curiae, to be
filed no later than March 3, 2010. Other persons or groups interested in the
determination of the issues presented in this case may move the Court for permission to
file briefs amicus curiae, to be filed no later than March 3, 2010.
2
CORRIGAN, J. (concurring).
I concur in the order granting leave. I write separately to ask the parties to
comment on an additional element of this case for the benefit of the Court. The parties
executed an affidavit of parentage (AOP) under the Michigan Acknowledgment of
Parentage Act (MAPA), MCL 722.1003. Under MCL 722.1004, an AOP “may be the
basis for court ordered child support,” among other things. Accordingly, I note that the
matter of child support here was referred to the Monroe County Friend of the Court. Yet
defendant apparently refused to provide forms and financial documentation requested by
the Friend of the Court concerning his child support obligations. The court ultimately
adopted the Friend of the Court’s recommendation, which imputed to defendant income
equal to that of plaintiff and ordered support. I would ask the parties: 1) whether and
how the child support matter affects the jurisdictional question in this case, and 2)
whether the Michigan trial court’s jurisdiction over child support is coextensive with its
jurisdiction over custody.
I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the
foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.
December 16, 2009 _________________________________________
d1215 Clerk