Go To Top capitol dome
Michigan Legislature
Michigan Compiled Laws Complete Through PA 348 of 2018
House: Adjourned until Tuesday, November 27, 2018 1:30:00 PM
Senate: Adjourned until Tuesday, November 27, 2018 10:00:00 AM

Michigan Legislature

Main Content

Section 722.1309

UNIFORM CHILD-CUSTODY JURISDICTION AND ENFORCEMENT ACT (EXCERPT)
Act 195 of 2001


722.1309 Delivery of child to petitioner; grounds for exception; expenses; additional relief; refusal to testify; inference; privilege against disclosure.

Sec. 309.

(1) Unless the court issues a temporary emergency order as provided in section 204, upon a finding that a petitioner is immediately entitled to the physical custody of the child, the court shall order the child delivered to the petitioner unless the respondent establishes either of the following:

(a) The child-custody determination has not been registered and confirmed under section 304 and 1 or more of the following:

(i) The issuing court did not have jurisdiction under article 2.

(ii) The child-custody determination for which enforcement is sought has been vacated, stayed, or modified by a court of a state having jurisdiction to do so under article 2 or federal law.

(iii) The respondent was entitled to notice, but notice was not given in accordance with the standards of section 108 in the proceedings before the court that issued the order for which enforcement is sought.

(b) The child-custody determination for which enforcement is sought was registered and confirmed under section 304, but has been vacated, stayed, or modified by a court of a state having jurisdiction to do so under article 2 or federal law.

(2) The court shall award the fees, costs, and expenses authorized under section 311 and may grant additional relief, including a request for the assistance of law enforcement officials, and schedule a further hearing to determine whether additional relief is appropriate.

(3) If a party called to testify refuses to answer on the grounds that the testimony may be self-incriminating, the court may draw an adverse inference from the refusal.

(4) A privilege against disclosure of communications between spouses and a defense of immunity based on the relationship of husband and wife or parent and child cannot be invoked in a proceeding under this article.


History: 2001, Act 195, Eff. Apr. 1, 2002


© 2017 Legislative Council, State of Michigan

up icon