The Kronzek Firm PLC

07/22/2026

Michigan's Highest Court Just Changed the Rules on Kids, Car Insurance, and Custody Orders

If you're divorced and share custody of your children, this new Michigan Supreme Court decision matters to you. The court's opinion arose with an interesting ruling about the ways a child's domicile should be determined. The interesting part is that the underlying case involved Michigan's automobile no fault law.

Today, in Frownfelter v Esurance Property & Casualty Insurance Co, the Michigan Supreme Court overruled a 2013 case called Grange Ins Co of Mich v Lawrence. Under Grange, courts were required to treat a custody order as the final word on where a child was "domiciled" — meaning the parent named in the order determined which parent's car insurance had to cover the child in an accident, even if that's not where the child actually spent most of their time.

This case shows exactly why that rule caused problems. McKenna Frownfelter's parents divorced in 2011, and their custody order gave them a 50/50 split. But over the years, without ever changing the paperwork, she ended up spending about 75% of her time at her mom's house. When she was badly injured in a car accident leaving her dad's house one morning, the insurance companies fought over who was on the hook — and the lower courts sided with the old paper order instead of reality.

The Supreme Court said that's not good enough. Going forward, a custody order is just a starting point. Courts now have to look at the real facts: where the child actually spends most of their time, where they actually sleep most nights, and other practical factors — not just what a years-old court order says.

What does this mean for you? If your actual parenting time schedule doesn't match your custody order anymore, that mismatch could create real insurance headaches for your family down the road. It's worth having your order reviewed to make sure it reflects your current reality.

Questions about your custody order or how it might affect your family? We're here to help. KronzekFirm.com

07/08/2026

Michigan Supreme Court: Being High Can Make a Miranda Waiver Invalid — Here's Why That Matters

The Michigan Supreme Court just issued an important ruling on Miranda rights, and it's worth understanding if you or someone you know is ever questioned by police.

In People v. Soriano, the defendant had taken a large amount of L*D before an alleged sexual assault. Roughly two hours later, while still showing signs of confusion and erratic behavior, he was taken to a hospital, read his Miranda rights, and made an incriminating statement to a Grand Traverse County sheriff's deputy. That statement became a central piece of evidence at trial, and a jury convicted him of assault with intent to commit criminal sexual conduct involving pe*******on.

The Michigan Supreme Court reversed the conviction in a 6-1 decision, with the majority opinion written by Justice Kimberly Thomas. The Court's reasoning is important for anyone who thinks Miranda rights are a simple checkbox: voluntary intoxication doesn't automatically invalidate a Miranda waiver. The real question is whether the person had the mental capacity, at that moment, to actually understand the rights they were giving up. Our criminal defense team understands that voluntary intoxication has always been a difficult defense in Michigan courts.

Courts look at the totality of the circumstances — age, experience with law enforcement, education, and background all matter. Here, the short gap between the defendant's documented erratic, hallucinatory behavior and the Miranda warning was enough for the Court to conclude he couldn't have truly understood what he was waiving, even though the worst of the hallucinations had passed by the time he was questioned.

The Court also rejected the idea that the error was "harmless." The Court of Appeals had reasoned that other evidence was strong enough to convict regardless. The Supreme Court disagreed, explaining that the improperly admitted statement was too central to the prosecution's case on intent — a required element for this specific charge — to say the jury would have reached the same result without it. The case now returns to the trial court.

Why does this matter beyond one case? Because it's a reminder that a Miranda waiver here in Michigan isn't just about whether the words were read aloud — it's about whether the person being questioned was actually capable of understanding them. That distinction can be the difference between evidence being used against someone and evidence being thrown out.

If you or a family member has been questioned by police — especially under circumstances involving intoxication, injury, youth, or mental impairment — the details of how and when Miranda rights were given can matter enormously to your case. Our Michigan criminal defense attorneys have spent more than 32 years handling these issues in courts across the state, and we know how to scrutinize whether a waiver actually holds up.

Questions about your rights during a police interrogation? Give us a call at 866-7NoJail (866 766 5245) during business hours. We're here to help.

Call now to connect with business.

07/06/2026

Big news for Michigan probationers from the criminal defense team at The Kronzek Firm: 🌿⚖️

The Michigan Supreme Court just handed down a major decision that affects anyone on probation who legally uses recreational ma*****na. In People v. Hess, our Michigan Supreme Court ruled that judges CANNOT ban lawful ma*****na use as a probation condition just because it's still illegal under federal law.

Here's the backstory: the defendant in this case was on probation for a retail fraud plea. She wasn't allowed to use ma*****na as a condition of that probation. After testing positive twice, she was hit with probation violations and lost her Holmes Youthful Trainee Act (HYTA) status. She argued that since her use was legal under Michigan's Regulation and Taxation of Ma*****na Act (MRTMA), the ban on her probation shouldn't stand.

The Supreme Court agreed with her. They pointed back to an earlier case, and confirmed that federal ma*****na law doesn't override Michigan's own voter-approved ma*****na protections. Bottom line: courts have to follow Michigan law when setting probation conditions, unless federal law actually takes precedence — and here, it doesn't.

But here's the important part people need to understand: this ruling does NOT mean every probationer now has an unrestricted right to use ma*****na. The Court kept this decision narrow. It only said judges can't impose a blanket ban based solely on ma*****na's federal illegality. The Court specifically left open whether judges can still restrict MRTMA-compliant ma*****na use on a case-by-case basis — for example, if it relates to someone's rehabilitation, criminal history, or substance abuse issues. That question is still unresolved and will likely come up in future Michigan appeals.

So if you're on probation or facing sentencing in Michigan, don't assume all ma*****na restrictions are automatically off the table. Courts still have to look at the specific facts of each case.

This is exactly the kind of legal development that can make a real difference in how a case is handled — and why staying informed on Michigan criminal law matters.

Call now to connect with business.

06/27/2026

The Traverse City CPS Case: A Wake-Up Call for Michigan Parents

Like many of you, our team at The Kronzek Firm has been closely following the recent reports regarding the Pete Buttigieg family in Traverse City. It is a deeply unsettling story: a family targeted by a malicious, anonymous, and false report to Children's Protective Services (CPS), leading to police involvement and the traumatic 24-hour separation of the parents from their four-year-old twins.

While the Buttigieg family’s experience is garnering national headlines, we want to be clear: the devastating process they endured is an all-too-familiar reality for countless Michigan families we represent every single day.

What Really Happened?

Authorities confirmed that the report targeting the Buttigieg family was a hoax. The anonymous caller fabricated a story about violent crimes in Alabama—a place the family had never even been. Yet, despite the lack of initial evidence, the system’s "shoot first, aim second" approach was triggered. This resulted in forensic interviews and the forced separation of a family before the allegations were ever substantiated. Let's be clear. These false reports are common. We see them during custody battles, family disputes, school rivalries, and broken friendships amongst other equally absurd excuses.

The Broken System We See Every Week

As defense attorneys who specialize in representing parents against CPS, we see this mechanism at work constantly. Too often, a single anonymous, unfounded allegation is enough to turn a family’s life upside down.

Here is what we see regularly:

Defaulting to Separation: The system frequently prioritizes the sudden "emergency" removal of children or the restriction of parental contact as an initial response, even when the danger is hypothetical or completely fabricated.

The Weight of "Forensic Interviews": The process of subjecting young children to interviews with strangers, outside of the presence of their loving parents, is inherently traumatizing—regardless of the final outcome.

The Burden of Proof: Families are often left scrambling to prove their innocence against allegations they aren't even permitted to understand fully, all while the state’s "emergency" procedures are already in motion.

We Need Child Welfare Reform in Michigan

Mayor Pete’s experience must serve as a catalyst for meaningful change. Child welfare reform here in Michigan is long overdue. While we recognize that CPS workers have a difficult job and that there are times when removal is necessary to protect children from genuine, immediate danger, the current process often inflicts more trauma on children than the very situations they are supposedly being protected from. Children frequently suffer this child abuse at the hands of CPS workers that are hired to protect them from child abuse.

If you are a parent facing a Michigan CPS investigation, do not wait until the damage is done. The system will be overwhelming, but you do not have to navigate it alone. Our warriors fight to protect children from being abused by the child abuse system.

Our experienced CPS defense team at The Kronzek Firm is committed to protecting parental rights and ensuring that families are treated with the dignity and fairness they deserve under the law. If your family is under investigation, reach out to us today.

05/18/2026

Last night in East Lansing, Michigan, something happened that should concern every Michigan voter who believes in the First Amendment and accountability.

At The Kronzek Firm, we are a team of attorneys who took an oath to support, defend, and uphold the United States Constitution — including the First Amendment and its protections for free speech and open public discourse. Let's remember that the Constitution has served us well for 250 years.

That is why we are deeply alarmed and offended by the actions taken by the Michigan State University Board of Trustees during a hastily called special Sunday night meeting on May 17, 2026.

By a 5–3 vote, the Board adopted a new “Ethics Code” that appears designed to silence elected trustees who disagree with the board majority. Let’s be clear about what this means:

• Elected trustees — elected directly by Michigan voters — are now reportedly prohibited from publicly disagreeing with board decisions.

• Trustees are expected to demonstrate “loyalty” to the institution, which many will understandably interpret as loyalty to the majority’s agenda.

• Trustees may be restricted from sharing information with the public, even when voters deserve transparency from the officials they elected.

• Trustees who speak out may face punishment, including censure, exclusion from events, and loss of reimbursements.

Regardless of political affiliation or opinion about any individual trustee, every Michigan citizen should be troubled when elected officials are discouraged from speaking openly to the public that elected them.

The answer to disagreement in a democracy is not enforced silence.

Universities should be places where open debate, differing viewpoints, and transparency are protected — not suppressed.

Michigan voters deserve elected representatives who can speak freely, ask difficult questions, and communicate honestly with the public without fear of retaliation.

This issue goes far beyond campus politics. It touches the core principles of free speech, government transparency, and democratic accountability.

Every citizen should be paying attention.

05/14/2026

Big news for Michigan family law from our Lansing family law attorneys.

In a new published decision, our Michigan Court of Appeals issued an important ruling in Winkler v. Winkler, a Roscommon County custody case that now impacts family courts across the entire state of Michigan.

The Court upheld the trial court’s decisions awarding sole legal custody to the father and keeping the child enrolled in the Houghton Lake school district. The appellate court also agreed that the trial court properly handled the evidence and correctly analyzed the child’s best-interest factors.

But the Court of Appeals drew a clear legal line when it came to one part of the lower court’s order.

The trial court had required both parents to complete psychological evaluations before either parent could file future motions involving custody or parenting time. The Court of Appeals ruled that this requirement violated Michigan law.

According to the Court, MCL 722.27(1)(c) already establishes the legal standard for seeking a custody or parenting-time modification: a parent must show “proper cause” or a “change in circumstances.” Courts cannot add extra hurdles that are not authorized by statute.

The Court explained that judges may still order psychological evaluations after a motion is filed if those evaluations are relevant to custody, parenting time, or the child’s best interests. However, courts cannot block parents from even filing a motion unless they first complete psychological testing.

The ruling also reinforces that trial courts must use legally authorized tools — such as sanctions for frivolous or excessive filings — rather than restricting access to the court system through unauthorized preconditions.

This is a significant decision for Michigan parents, family law attorneys, referees, and judges because it clarifies the limits of judicial authority in custody and parenting-time disputes.

At The Kronzek Firm, we closely monitor major appellate decisions affecting Michigan families and parental rights statewide.

03/27/2026

Information from our family law team in Oakland County:

Parents who owe a significant amount of child support soon could lose their ability to travel internationally as the Trump administration expands and steps up enforcement of a 30-year-old law that allows the federal government to revoke American passports until payments are made, three U.S. officials told The Associated Press. That's great news for parents should be receiving child support but they struggle when those payments aren't made.

While passport revocations for past due child support of more than $2,500 have been permitted under 1996 federal legislation, the State Department had in the past acted only when someone applied to renew their travel document or sought other consular services. In other words, enforcement depended on the person approaching the department for assistance. Fortunately, that appears to be changing in the near future.

Starting soon, however, the department will begin to revoke passports on its own initiative based on data shared with it by the Health and Human Services Department, according to the U.S. officials familiar with the plan. Michigan law is clear. A child has the right to be supported by both parents.

03/06/2026

LEGAL ALERT FROM OUR TRIAL TEAM: Is Your Color Printer "Snitching" on You? ⚖️
Our trial attorneys are always learning more about technology forensics. This was a new one for us and most Michigan residents don’t realize that their home or office printer is leaving a digital fingerprint on every document they produce. If you’ve ever printed in color, you’ve likely participated in a silent tracking program without your consent.
The Hidden Secret: Machine Identification Codes (MIC)
Take a color-printed page and shine a blue LED light on it. You’ll see a faint grid of tiny yellow dots. These aren't a mistake; they are Machine Identification Codes.
These tiny dots, less than a millimeter wide, are automatically printed on every page you print on a color printer, by almost every major brand—including HP, Canon, and Xerox. They encode:
✅ Your printer’s unique serial number
✅ The exact date of printing
✅ The exact time you hit "Print."
Why This Matters for Your Privacy
Begun in the 1980s to detect counterfeiting, this spy technology is now a powerful forensic tool. In a famous 2017 case, a federal whistleblower was identified and sentenced to five years in prison after security researchers decoded the yellow dots on a secret, leaked document.
While you may not be handling government secrets, this "tracking kiss" applies to:
Confidential medical records
Sensitive financial documents
Anonymous correspondence

How to Protect Your Anonymity
At The Kronzek Firm, we value the privacy and rights of our fellow Michiganders. After all, we live and breathe security and confidentiality for our clients. If you are printing confidential information that requires true anonymity, consider using a black-and-white only laser printer. Because these machines lack yellow toner, they typically do not include these tracking patterns.
Knowledge is your best friend. Stay informed, stay private.
📊 Did you know? Researchers tested 106 printer models from 18 different manufacturers. 100% of them contained hidden tracking codes on every page printed.

The Kronzek Firm
📍 Lansing | Detroit
🌐

Family Law, Criminal Defense, CPS Defense, Estate Planning, Bankruptcy, Drunk Driving Defense, S*x Crime Defense and Civil Litigation. Call Now 517-886-1000

02/10/2026

It's tax time again, which means that our family law attorneys are getting lots of phone calls from our clients about child related tax exemptions and credits. Here is some general information, but always consult with your tax preparer before making tax filing decisions:

Understanding Child Tax Benefits After Divorce in Michigan

Navigating tax issues after divorce can be complicated for Michigan families. If you're a divorced or legally separated parent, understanding who can claim child-related federal tax benefits is crucial for your financial planning.

Who Gets to Claim the Child?

Under IRS regulations, the parent with whom the child spends the majority of nights during the tax year is generally considered the "custodial parent" for tax purposes. This custodial parent typically receives the right to claim various child-related tax benefits, including the dependency exemption and Child Tax Credit.

Can Tax Benefits Be Transferred?

Yes, under specific circumstances. Federal tax law allows the custodial parent to release certain tax benefits to the noncustodial parent by completing IRS Form 8332 (Release/Revocation of Release of Claim to Exemption for Child by Custodial Parent). When this form is properly executed and the noncustodial parent attaches it to their tax return, they may claim specific tax benefits.

What Benefits Can and Cannot Be Transferred?

It's important to understand that not all tax benefits can be released to the noncustodial parent. Certain benefits always remain with the custodial parent, including:

Head of Household filing status
Child and Dependent Care Credit
Earned Income Tax Credit (in most cases)

Additionally, the custodial parent retains the right to revoke a previously granted release of tax benefits by providing proper notice to the noncustodial parent and the IRS.

Michigan Divorce and Tax Planning

These federal tax rules interact with Michigan divorce judgments and parenting time arrangements. Your divorce settlement or custody order should address these tax considerations to prevent future disputes. The federal tax law does allow the Michigan Judgment of Divorce to deviate from some of the above guidelines. So our divorce attorneys regularly negotiate divorce agreements that take into consider that way that each parent may/may not use their children as tax exemptions or credits.

Get Professional Guidance

The intersection of Michigan family law and federal tax regulations is complex. When our legal team is negotiating a divorce settlement, modifying custody arrangements, or have questions about tax benefits, our experienced family law attorneys can help protect your interests.

Contact our Lansing or Oakland County, Michigan offices today to discuss your specific situation and ensure you're maximizing your tax benefits while complying with all applicable laws. You can reach us by calling 800-576-6035. Always consult your tax preparer before making final decisions about tax filings.

Call now to connect with business.

01/31/2026

Heads Up: The Post Office (USPS) Just Changed How Postmarks Work

If you rely on mailing documents and need to meet deadlines — tax returns, rent payments, legal notices, etc. — listen up.

The USPS has a new rule (DMM §608.11) that changes when your mail gets postmarked.

Postmarks will now show the date your mail is first processed at a USPS sorting facility, NOT the day you dropped it in the mailbox or handed it over at the counter.

👉 What does that mean for you?

Your envelope may receive a postmark that’s one or more days after the day you actually mailed it. And for anything with a strict deadline, that delay could cause problems.

📌 Why it matters:

Postmarks are often used as proof that something was mailed on time — especially for:
• Tax filings
• Rent or bill payments
• Court filings and legal notices

If the postmark is delayed, it could look like you missed a deadline even when you didn’t.

📑 How to protect yourself:
• Mail very early, especially for anything time‑sensitive.
• Ask for a manual postmark at the post office counter if you need same‑day proof.
• File electronically whenever possible — it gives you a clear, timestamped record.

At both our Lansing, Michigan, and Oakland County, Michigan, law offices, mail delivery is sporadic and unreliable. Mail can take weeks or months to reach its final local destination. When we can send documents or communications electronically, we usually choose that option. Sometimes we have to go so far as to courier them for hand delivery. These days, we do not advise people to rely on U.S. Mail delivery.

Staying ahead of these changes can help you avoid unnecessary headaches. If you’re unsure how this might affect your legal obligations or deadlines, reach out to an experienced attorney for guidance.

Call now to connect with business.