Grandparenting time; Whether the presumption in MCL 722.27b(4)(b) was rebutted; Best-interest determination; Best-interest factors; MCL 722.27b(6)(a)-(g), (i), & (j); Great weight of the evidence

The court “affirmed the trial court’s holding that the presumption found in MCL 722.27b(4)(b) was rebutted by a preponderance of the evidence.” Also, it affirmed “the trial court’s holding that grandparenting time was in [the child-]VPL’s best interests.” Thus, it affirmed the trial court’s order granting plaintiffs grandparenting time. Defendant-mother argued “that the trial court erred by determining that her decision, as a fit parent, to deny grandparenting time created a substantial risk of harm to VPL’s mental, physical, or emotional health.” Based on the “testimony, including evidence that VPL was upset when he could not see plaintiffs, various witnesses’ concerns about defendant’s parenting, and the general principle that the removal of attachment figures could create a higher likelihood of damage to a child, we conclude that the evidence does not clearly preponderate against the trial court’s determination that plaintiffs satisfied the rebuttable presumption.” Further, the court found that “to the extent that defendant’s testimony contradicted this evidence, this Court must defer to the trial court’s credibility assessments.” It held that the “trial court’s findings were not against the great weight of the evidence.”