C in Re a Kristofferson Minor ( 2024 )

If this opinion indicates that it is “FOR PUBLICATION,” it is subject to revision until final publication in the Michigan Appeals Reports. STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS UNPUBLISHED In re A. KRISTOFFERSON, Minor. May 16, 2024 No. 368805 Ingham Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 22-000106-NA Before: JANSEN, P.J., and MURRAY and O’BRIEN, JJ. MURRAY, J. (concurring). I concur with the majority opinion, except for footnote 1. As I read MCR 1.109(1)(b), in order for a court to utilize a salutation or pronoun different than what would be expected from the names on the caption, a party must designate the pronoun preference in the caption itself. Here, respondent mother has not done so, and in the brief on appeal respondent mother’s counsel refers to his client with the female pronoun. Though there is one mention by a witness in the trial court record that respondent mother identifies with a different gender, no formal request—as now allowed by court rule—was ever made in this Court. And, because the Supreme Court adopted this method of designation, and did so after input (positive and negative) from countless lawyers, judges, and the public, that rule should be followed before we utilize a pronoun or salutation that differs from what would be expected from the names listed in the caption. /s/ Christopher M. Murray -1-