Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

McIntosh v. McIntosh

Michigan Court of Appeals
768 N.W.2d 325 (2009)


Facts

Mr. McIntosh (plaintiff) and Ms. McIntosh (defendant) were married on October 2, 2004. The McIntoshes had a son, Jordan, on May 5, 2006. A little over a year later, on July 5, 2007, Mr. McIntosh filed a complaint for divorce. Mr. McIntosh simultaneously moved the trial court for an ex parte order granting him sole legal and physical custody of Jordan. The trial court entered an ex parte order, but shortly afterward entered a consent order to provide for equal division of physical custody. Mr. and Ms. McIntosh were unable to manage Jordan's parenting exchanges amicably and eventually had to pick up and drop off Jordan at the local police station. The trial judge requested that a neutral psychologist perform psychological evaluations of Mr. and Ms. McIntosh. Upon completion of the evaluations, the psychologist recommended that Mr. and Ms. McIntosh share joint legal and physical custody of Jordan. At trial, Ms. McIntosh provided evidence that Mr. McIntosh had a history of alcohol use, had withheld the minor child from Ms. McIntosh without cause, and had been violent in the home on at least one occasion. Upon considering the weight of the evidence and applying it to the best-interest factors, the trial court declined to adopt the neutral psychologist's recommendation. Instead, the trial court held that Ms. McIntosh was entitled to sole legal and physical custody of the minor child. Mr. McIntosh appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Kelly, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 175,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.