After referencing Webster's definition for "consider" the court held that MCL 722.31(4) only "requires a trial court to carefully think about, take into account, or asses each factor, but there is no indication that a trial court is required to take further action, such as making findings on the record." Additionally, changes in parenting time arrangements that modify an established custodial environment can only be made following a balancing of the best interest factors under MCL 722.23, not under MCL 722.31, which is a separate standard. In Yachcik v Yachcik, following the trial court's denial of the motion to change the minor child's domicile, and taking into consideration that the plaintiff would move despite the court's decision, the trial court entered a parenting time change.

Accordingly, the trial court determined that plaintiff had to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that changing schools was in the best interests of the children. After addressing all of the statutory best-interest factors pursuant to MCL 722.23, the trial court concluded that a preponderance of the evidence showed that changing schools was in the children’s best interest. Accordingly, the trial court granted plaintiff’s motion to modify parenting time, reversing the existing parenting-time order so that plaintiff had 225 overnights per year, and defendant 140.

After a 19 day trial, the court awarded shared physical custody, joint legal custody, ordered the father to pay child support to the mother, and ordered the father to pay both his attorney fees and a portion of the mother’s. On appeal, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that the trial court properly weighed the best interest factors contained in MCL 722.23, and properly found that both parents could care for the child and provide the child with love and affection. The court also held that the trial court did not err in providing for parenting time with the father to gradually increase over time.