This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

This was a child custody dispute between the natural parents, the Schmidts (D), and the third-party custodians with whom the child now lives, the DeBoers (P). Ps got custody of a child by the power of the state but learned that less than a few days after getting custody that, D was claiming that the waiver of rights obtained by P's attorney was unlawful in that D had not been afforded the 72-hour waiting period as required by law. When the facts were actually produced, Cara Clausen, the birth mother of the child had lied about the father of the child and the father was in fact, Daniel Schmidt who filed an affidavit of paternity and a petition seeking to intervene in the adoption proceedings that P wanted to be completed. Ps lived in Michigan, and this proceeding was taking place in Iowa. The court issued a ruling that the adoption would not take place and that decision was affirmed by Iowa appeals courts. The court then ordered Ps to appear with the child, but they refused to do so and filed a petition in Michigan court. That court found that it had jurisdiction to determine the best interests of the child and denied D's motion for summary judgment to enforce the Iowa court decision. The court of appeals of Michigan reversed, but another proceeding was initiated by P for the child custody, declaratory relief, and injunctive relief by the child herself by her friend, an attorney, Peter Darrow; the child was ordered to remain where she was. D's filed an appeal.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.