“[T]here is authority for the proposition that the power of equity includes the power to set aside an adoption where fraud at the time of adoption is shown, despite the lack of a statutory basis for revocation of an adoption. . . . The fraud which justifies equitable interference with a [court] order must be fraud in obtaining the order and not merely constructive, but positive, fraud. Because Michigan courts are extremely reluctant to set aside adoptions, a case of significant fraud must be made out.” In re Neagos, 176 Mich App 406, 411-412 (1989). In Neagos, the Court of Appeals “agree[d] with the [trial] court that there was an inadequate showing of fraud to justify reopening the matter on equitable grounds[] . . . [where the] petitioner[-biological mother’s] psychological stress and legal awareness at the time she gave her consent to adoption [were] not allegations of positive fraud perpetrated upon herself or the court, but a collateral attack on the [adoption] proceedings. Nor [did the mother’s] allegation that [the adoptive parents] broke their promise to allow visitation with the children amount to a positive fraud in the adoption process[]” because “she agreed to relinquish all rights to the children[,]” which “negate[d her] claim of fraud regarding possible ‘side agreements.’”Id., citing In re Leach, 373 Mich 148 (1964) and In re Kozak, 92 Mich App 579 (1979).