4.2Subject Matter Jurisdiction

A court’s assumption of subject matter jurisdiction should be distinguished from the court’s exercise of jurisdiction over the child (personal jurisdiction). Subject matter jurisdiction is a court’s authority to exercise judicial power over a particular class of cases (e.g., child protection cases). In re AMB, 248 Mich App 144, 166 (2001). However, personal jurisdiction may be exercised only after the court makes a determination regarding the specific facts of a case. In re Brock, 442 Mich 101, 108-109 (1993).

A.Exclusive Jurisdiction

The Family Division of the Circuit Court has exclusive jurisdiction over child protective proceedings. MCL 600.1021(1)(e); MCL 712A.2(b).

Note: Prior to January 1, 1998, the Juvenile Division of the Probate Court had jurisdiction over child protective proceedings. Thus, any reference to the former Juvenile Division of the Probate Court in any statute must be construed as a reference to the Family Division of the Circuit Court. MCL 600.1009.

See also MCR 3.903(A)(4) where court means Family Division of the Circuit Court when used within subchapter 3.900 of the court rules.

A child protective proceeding is a “proceeding concerning an offense against a child.” MCR 3.903(A)(2). Specifically, an offense against a child means “an act or omission by a parent, guardian, nonparent adult, or legal custodian asserted as grounds for bringing the child within the jurisdiction of the court pursuant to the Juvenile Code.” MCR 3.903(C)(9).

However, child protective proceedings are not criminal proceedings. MCL 712A.1(2). See People v Ali, 328 Mich App 538, 548 (2019) (“these proceedings are fundamentally different: one is civil, the other criminal; they both serve different purposes and implicate different state interests (enforcement of the criminal laws and the safety and security of the child); each involves different burdens of proof and different procedural requirements; and criminal proceedings tend to be more adversarial in nature”).

Because MCL 712A.2(b) specifically grants the Family Division of the Circuit Court subject matter jurisdiction over cases concerning children under the age of eighteen, the family courts have jurisdiction over a large area of cases involving children. In re AMB, 248 Mich App 144, 167 (2001). In In re AMB, the trial court had subject matter jurisdiction over the child protective proceeding based on the original petition alleging that a critically-ill premature infant’s mother was not able to provide her infant with proper custody or a fit home.¹ In re AMB, supra at 168. After the infant’s health dramatically changed and doctors recommended changing her treatment from sustentation of life to withdrawal of life support, an amended petition was filed requesting the trial court render a decision in the infant’s best interests. Id. at 168-170. The infant’s attorney argued on appeal that the trial court was stripped of its subject matter jurisdiction when the amended petition changed the focus from protecting the infant to ending her life. Id. at 165-166. The Court of Appeals disagreed and found that

“The amended petition raised questions of fact and law that depended entirely on the statutory bases for subject-matter jurisdiction in this case. While [the infant’s] health status may have been changing, her underlying need to have someone make decisions for her and to care for her remained the same throughout the proceedings. Thus, this request for a best interests ruling still was within the ‘class’ of cases or issues concerning which the family court may make a decision.

Though [the infant’s attorney] attempts to distinguish between the family court’s responsibility to protect children and the effect of removing life support, the request for relief in the amended petition, at least arguably, did not ask the family court to abandon its duty to protect [the infant]. Rather, the amended petition asked for a ruling on what course of conduct would be in [the infant’s] best interests.” In re AMB, 248 Mich App at 170-171.

Note: See Section 3.3 for a detailed discussion of the court’s authority to order medical treatment or cessation of treatment for a child.

B.Jurisdiction of Proceedings Involving “Dependent” Juveniles

The Family Division of the Circuit Court has jurisdiction over “proceedings concerning a juvenile under 18 years of age” if “the juvenile is dependent and is in danger of substantial physical or psychological harm[]” under certain circumstances. MCL 712A.2(b)(3). “The juvenile may be found to be dependent when any of the following occurs:

(A) The juvenile is homeless or not domiciled with a parent or other legally responsible person.

(B) The juvenile has repeatedly run away from home and is beyond the control of a parent or other legally responsible person.

(C) The juvenile is alleged to have committed a commercial sexual activity as that term is defined in . . . MCL 750.462a[,] or a delinquent act that is the result of force, fraud, coercion, or manipulation exercised by a parent or other adult.

(D) The juvenile’s custodial parent or legally responsible person has died or has become permanently incapacitated and no appropriate parent or legally responsible person is willing and able to provide care for the juvenile.” MCL 712A.2(b)(3)(A)-(D).

Dependency jurisdiction may also apply to child trafficking victims. For additional information, see the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, Human Trafficking of Children Protocol.²

C.Ancillary Jurisdiction of Guardianship Proceedings

The Family Division of the Circuit Court has ancillary jurisdiction of guardianship proceedings under Article 5 of the Estates and Protected Individuals Code (EPIC), MCL 700.5101 et seq. MCL 600.1021(2)(a). See Section 4.6 for information on the court’s authority to take jurisdiction over a child following the appointment of a guardian, and Section 13.9(A) for information on the appointment of a guardian.

D.Safe Delivery of Newborns Law

The Family Division of the Circuit Court has jurisdiction over a newborn child who has been surrendered to an emergency service provider as provided in the Safe Delivery of Newborns Law. MCL 712.1(2)(b); MCL 712.2(1). See Section 3.1(D) for information on the custody of a child under the Safe Delivery of Newborns Law, and Section 8.14 for information on the placement of a child under the Safe Delivery of Newborns Law.

The court may appoint a lawyer-guardian ad litem to represent the newborn’s interests. MCL 712.2(1). See Section 7.9 for information on a lawyer-guardian ad litem’s powers and duties.