Grand Rapids Child Custody Attorney | Michigan Legal and Physical Custody | Grand Rapids Child Custody Lawyer


When you are facing a child custody dispute in the Grand Rapids area and West Michigan area, it is important to have the representation of a great child custody attorney. Krupp Law Offices P.C. has been providing quality child custody representation for over 85 years. If you are facing a child custody dispute or are anticipating a divorce and custody is at issue, call the child custody attorneys at Krupp Law Offices PC for a free phone consultation. During your phone consultation, our attorneys will provide you with immediate answers to your questions and schedule an appointment with one of our child custody attorneys.



Definitions. Sec. 2. As used in this act:

(a) "Active military duty" means when a reserve unit member or national guard unit member is called into active military duty.

(b) "Agency" means a legally authorized public or private organization, or governmental unit or official,whether of this state or of another state or country, concerned in the welfare of minor children, including a licensed child placement agency.

(c) "Attorney" means, if appointed to represent a child under this act, an attorney serving as the child's legal advocate in a traditional attorney-client relationship with the child, as governed by the Michigan rules of professional conduct. An attorney defined under this subdivision owes the same duties of undivided loyalty,confidentiality, and zealous representation of the child's expressed wishes as the attorney would to an adult client.

(d) "Child" means minor child and children. Subject to section 5b of the support and parenting time enforcement act, 1982 PA 295, MCL 552.605b, for purposes of providing support, child includes a child and children who have reached 18 years of age.

(e) "Grandparent" means a natural or adoptive parent of a child's natural or adoptive parent.

(f) "Guardian ad litem" means an individual whom the court appoints to assist the court in determining the child's best interests. A guardian ad litem does not need to be an attorney.

(g) "Lawyer-guardian ad litem" means an attorney appointed under section 4. A lawyer-guardian ad litem represents the child, and has the powers and duties, as set forth in section 4.

(h) "Parent" means the natural or adoptive parent of a child.

(i)"State disbursement unit" or "SDU" means the entity established in section 6 of the office of child support act, 1971 PA 174, MCL 400.236.

(j) "Third person" means an individual other than a parent.

Sec. 3.

(a) The love, affection, and other emotional ties existing between the parties involved and the child.

(b) The capacity and disposition of the parties involved to give the child love, affection, and guidance and to continue the education and raising of the child in his or her religion or creed, if any.

(c) The capacity and disposition of the parties involved to provide the child with food, clothing, medical care or other remedial care recognized and permitted under the laws of this state in place of medical care, and other material needs.

(d) The length of time the child has lived in a stable, satisfactory environment, and the desirability of maintaining continuity.

(e) The permanence, as a family unit, of the existing or proposed custodial home or homes.

(f ) The moral fitness of the parties involved.

(g) The mental and physical health of the parties involved.

(h) The home, school, and community record of the child

(i) The reasonable preference of the child, if the court considers the child to be of sufficient age to express a preference.

(j) The willingness and ability of each of the parties to facilitate and encourage a close and continuing parent-child relationship between the child and the other parent or the child and the parents.

(k) Domestic violence, regardless of whether the violence was directed against or witnessed by the child.

(l) Any other factor considered by the court to be relevant to a particular child custody dispute.


Child custody disputes; controlling interests, presumption; award of custody to parent convicted of criminal sexual conduct. Sec. 5.

(1) If a child custody dispute is between the parents, between agencies, or between third persons,the best interests of the child control. If the child custody dispute is between the parent or parents and an agency or a third person, the court shall presume that the best interests of the child are served by awarding custody to the parent or parents, unless the contrary is established by clear and convincing evidence.

(2) Notwithstanding other provisions of this act, if a child custody dispute involves a child who is conceived as the result of acts for which 1 of the child's biological parents is convicted of criminal sexual conduct as provided in sections 520a to 520e and 520g of the Michigan penal code, Act No. 328 of the Public Acts of 1931, being sections 750.520a to 750.520e and 750.520g of the Michigan Compiled Laws, the court shall not award custody to the convicted biological parent. This subsection does not apply to a conviction under section 520d(1)(a) of the Michigan penal code, Act No. 328 of the Public Acts of 1931, being section 750.520d of the Michigan Compiled Laws. This subsection does not apply if, after the date of the conviction,the biological parents cohabit and establish a mutual custodial environment for the child.

(3) Notwithstanding other provisions of this act, if an individual is convicted of criminal sexual conduct as provided in sections 520a to 520e and 520g of Act No. 328 of the Public Acts of 1931 and the victim is the individual's child, the court shall not award custody of that child or a sibling of that child to that individual, unless both the child's other parent and, if the court considers the child or sibling to be of sufficient age to express his or her desires, the child or sibling consent to the custody.


722.26a Joint custody. Sec. 6a.

(1) In custody disputes between parents, the parents shall be advised of joint custody. At the request of either parent, the court shall consider an award of joint custody, and shall state on the record the reasons for granting or denying a request. In other cases joint custody may be considered by the court. The court shall determine whether joint custody is in the best interest of the child by considering the following factors:

(a) The factors enumerated in section 3.

(b) Whether the parents will be able to cooperate and generally agree concerning important decisions affecting the welfare of the child.

(2) If the parents agree on joint custody, the court shall award joint custody unless the court determines on the record, based upon clear and convincing evidence, that joint custody is not in the best interests of the child.

(3) If the court awards joint custody, the court may include in its award a statement regarding when the child shall reside with each parent, or may provide that physical custody be shared by the parents in a manner to assure the child continuing contact with both parents.

(4) During the time a child resides with a parent, that parent shall decide all routine matters concerning the child.

(5) If there is a dispute regarding residency, the court shall state the basis for a residency award on the record or in writing.

(6) Joint custody shall not eliminate the responsibility for child support. Each parent shall be responsible for child support based on the needs of the child and the actual resources of each parent. If a parent would otherwise be unable to maintain adequate housing for the child and the other parent has sufficient resources,the court may order modified support payments for a portion of housing expenses even during a period when the child is not residing in the home of the parent receiving support. An order of joint custody, in and of itself,shall not constitute grounds for modifying a support order.

(7) As used in this section, “joint custody” means an order of the court in which 1 or both of the following is specified:

(a) That the child shall reside alternately for specific periods with each of the parents.

(b) That the parents shall share decision-making authority as to the important decisions affecting the welfare of the child.



If you are facing a child custody dispute, a good child custody attorney is not optional, it is a requirement! Our child custody attorneys can answer your questions with straight talk. Having the right child custody attorney on your side can relieve your stress during this difficult situation. Our attorneys have over 85 years of child custody experience. Our attorneys have extensive child custody trial experience. Typical fees to retain attorney for a child custody dispute can range and from 1,500 dollars to as high as 5000 dollars.

Considering the seriousness of this life changing event, it is extremely important to retain the services of an experienced attorney in the area of child custody.

Krupp Law Offices located in downtown Grand Rapids, Michigan and has the right child custody attorney for you.  We represent clients in all child csutody matters throughout West Michigan, including the cities of Grand Rapids, Holland, and Grand Haven, and the counties of Kent, Ottawa, Allegan, Barry, Newaygo, Montcalm, Muskegon, and Ionia.

Call for a free phone consulation.  Our office can help.

Christian Krupp

CEO & Founder

Christian G Krupp II was born and raised in Grand Rapids, Michigan.Chris attended Michigan State University and graduated in 1988.He attended Thomas M. Cooley Law School where he was a member of law review and one of the few students that had his law review article published.Christian Krupp graduated from law school with honors in the top ten percent of his class.His legal career started and Dykema Gossett, Michigan’s largest law firm.While at Dykema, he was involved in a diverse practice groups including the corporate, finance, and legislative areas.After leaving Dykema, Christian Krupp joined the Jackson County Prosecutor’s Office.

Read More

George Krupp

Creative Director

George Krupp was born in Grand Rapids, Michigan.He was admitted to practice law in 1961 and started practice in Grand Rapids, Michigan in 1962 in the Kent County Prosecutor’s Office.After years of success in the Kent County Prosecutor’s Office in Grand Rapids, Michigan, George Krupp left for private practice where he has worked for over fifty years.Over his fifty years of experience he has represented thousands of clients in civil and criminal cases.His primary concentration has been in domestic (family law / divorce cases) and criminal cases

Read More