Public Policy Update from the State Bar of Michigan
Spetember 9-15, 2013
Volume 11 Issue 37

In the Capitol
Committee meetings of interest for the week of 9/16
9/17 Senate Judiciary
Agenda:
SB318 Allow parole of certain juvenile offenders under certain circumstances;
SB319 Provide for procedures for determining whether juvenile convicted of murder should be sentenced to imprisonment without parole eligibility;
And any other business properly before the committee.

9/18 House Criminal Justice
Agenda:
HB 4839 Remove prohibition against victim disclosing information about conviction that has been set aside (Testimony Only);
HB 4930 Repeal prohibition against displaying certain emblems and insignias on motor vehicles under certain circumstances;
HB 4889 Increase penalties for certain controlled substance offenses involving travel from another state with the intent to deliver (Testimony Only).

Complete Committee Meeting List

New Public Acts

Legislation Introduced 9/10 – 9/12
View all bills introduced 9/10-9/12
Of Interest to the Legal Community
HB 4967 Law enforcement; law enforcement information network (LEIN); access to law enforcement information network (LEIN); amend revised judicature act to allow for department of corrections under certain circumstances. Amends sec. 1076 of 1961 PA 236 (MCL 600.1076).

HB 4968 Law enforcement; law enforcement information network (LEIN); access to law enforcement information network (LEIN); amend code of criminal procedure to allow for department of corrections under certain circumstances. Amends sec. 4a, ch. IX of 1927 PA 175 (MCL 769.4a).

HB 4969 Law enforcement; law enforcement information network (LEIN); access to law enforcement information network (LEIN); amend public health code to allow for department of corrections under certain circumstances. Amends sec. 7411 of 1978 PA 368 (MCL 333.7411).

SB 0465 Probate; guardians and conservators; jurisdictional provisions in the estates and protected individuals code; revise to reflect adoption of the uniform adult guardianship and protective proceedings jurisdiction act. Amends secs. 1301, 5307 & 5402 of 1998 PA 386 (MCL 700.1301 et seq.).

SB 0466 Probate; guardians and conservators; uniform adult guardianship and protective proceedings jurisdiction act; enact. Creates new act.

SB 0471 Criminal procedure; records; dissemination of juvenile criminal history record information; prohibit under certain circumstances. Amends sec. 2a of 1925 PA 289 (MCL 28.242a).

In the Hall of Justice

Court directs consistent, meaningful access to foreign language interpreters

The Michigan Supreme Court will hold an administrative public hearing on Wednesday, September 25, 2013, from 9:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. in the Supreme Court courtroom located on the sixth floor of the Michigan Hall of Justice, 925 W. Ottawa Street, Lansing, Michigan 48915.

Public Hearing Agenda

To reserve a place on the agenda, please notify the Office of the Clerk of the Court in writing at P.O. Box 30052, Lansing, Michigan 48909, or by e-mail at MSC_clerk@courts.mi.gov, no later than Monday, September 23, 2013.

2011-26 - Proposed Amendment of Rule 2.403 of the Michigan Court Rules
The proposed amendment of MCR 2.403(O)(8) would add a reference to a motion for rehearing or reconsideration (consistent with the Court of Appeals opinion in Meemic Ins Co v DTE Energy Co, 292 Mich App 278 [2011]), as well as a reference to other postjudgment motions to toll the period of time in which a party may file a request for case-evaluation sanctions.
SBM Position: Support with Recommended Amendments.

2011-31 - Proposed Amendment of Rules 7.105, 7.111 and 7.205 of the Michigan Court Rules
The proposed changes would permit the filing of a reply brief in support of an application for leave to appeal in the circuit court and the Court of Appeals. The proposed changes were submitted by the Appellate Practice Section of the State Bar of Michigan.
SBM Position: Support.
Appellate Practice Section Position: Support and Amend.
Family Law Section Position: Support.

2012-04 - Proposed Amendment of Rule 3.218 of the Michigan Court Rules
These proposed amendments would codify state and federal statutory and regulation revisions that have occurred in the last decade, and would add specificity and detail to the existing language in MCR 3.218.
SBM Position: Support.
Family Law Section Position: Support.

2012-06 - Proposed Amendment of Rule 9.221 of the Michigan Court Rules
The proposed amendment of MCR 9.221 would add a new subrule (I) that would require the Judicial Tenure Commission to notify a court’s chief judge if a referee or magistrate is subject to a corrective action that does not rise to the level of a formal complaint, including a letter of caution, a conditional dismissal, an admonishment, or a recommendation for private censure. The new requirement would not apply to a dismissal with explanation.
SBM Position: Oppose.

2012-30 - Proposed Amendments of Rule 2.621 and Rule 2.622 of the Michigan Court Rules
The proposed amendments of MCR 2.621 and MCR 2.622 were submitted to the Michigan Supreme Court on behalf of the “Receivership Committee” (a committee created because of a need identified by the Debtor/Creditor Rights Committee of the Business Law Section of the State Bar of Michigan) to expand and update the rules regarding receivership proceedings.
SBM Position: Support with amendment.
Family Law Section Position: Support.

2013-02 - Amendments of Rules 3.002, 3.800, 3.802, 3.807, 3.903, 3.905, 3.920, 3.921, 3.935, 3.961, 3.963, 3.965, 3.967, 3.974, 3.977, and 5.402 of the Michigan Court Rules
This proposal incorporates provisions of the newly enacted Michigan Indian Family Preservation Act into specific provisions within various rules relating to child protective proceedings and juvenile status offenses.
SBM Position: Support.
Family Law Section Position: Support.

2013-12 - Proposed Amendment of Rule 7.313 of the Michigan Court Rules
The proposed amendments would clarify that the decision whether to grant rehearing or reconsideration in the Michigan Supreme Court should be made consistent with the standard incorporated in MCR 2.119(F)(3), similar to the reference for consideration of such motions in the Court of Appeals contained in MCR 7.215(I)(l).
SBM Position: Support.

2013-18 - Proposed New Rules 2E.001 et seq. of the Michigan Court Rules
This series of proposed new “2E” rules contains court rules regarding e-filing in Michigan courts. Please note that this proposed order is part of a group of documents in this file that has been published for comment, including a proposed administrative order regarding e-filing rules and the proposed e-filing standards.
SBM Position: Support with comments from committees and sections.
Civil Procedure & Courts Committee: View Position
Criminal Jurisprudence & Practice Committee: View Position
Domestic Violence Committee: View Position
Committee on Justice Initiatives: View Position
General Practice Section: View Position

2013-18 - Proposed Administrative Order No. 2013-__
This proposed administrative order would require the State Court Administrator to promulgate e-filing standards, and would require courts that offer e-filing to comply with those standards. Please note that this proposed order is part of a group of documents in this file that has been published for comment, including proposed e-filing rules and proposed e-filing standards.
SBM Position: Support with comments from committees and sections.
Civil Procedure & Courts Committee: View Position
Criminal Jurisprudence & Practice Committee: View Position
Domestic Violence Committee: View Position
Committee on Justice Initiatives: View Position
General Practice Section: View Position

2013-18 - Draft Standards for E-filing
These proposed standards provide additional guidance for courts planning for implementation of e-filing in their jurisdiction. The proposed standards are published to provide a context for the proposed e-filing rules and proposed administrative order that have also been published for comment in this file.
SBM Position: Support with comments from committees and sections.
Civil Procedure & Courts Committee: View Position
Criminal Jurisprudence & Practice Committee: View Position
Domestic Violence Committee: View Position
Committee on Justice Initiatives: View Position
General Practice Section: View Position

2013-18 - Proposed Amendments of Rules 3.210, 3.215, and 6.104 of the Michigan Court Rules and Proposed New Rule 8.124 of the Michigan Court Rules
The new court rule would allow courts to use videoconferencing in court proceedings upon request of a participant or sua sponte by the court, subject to specified criteria and standards published by the State Court Administrative Office (SCAO). Amendments of MCR 3.210, MCR 3.215, and MCR 6.104 would be necessary to include references to the new court rule. If the new rule is ultimately adopted, MCR 3.904, MCR 5.738a, and MCR 6.006, and Administrative Order No. 2007-01 would be rescinded. To provide context for consideration of the proposed rule, the proposed standards for the use of videoconferencing are attached below. In addition, the proposal includes a draft administrative order that would require SCAO to adopt videoconferencing standards, and require courts to comply with those standards.
SBM Position: Support with an amendment to 8.124(B)(3) regarding criminal proceedings.

2013-18 – Proposed Administrative Order No. 2013-___
This proposed administrative order would require the State Court Administrator to establish videoconferencing standards and would require that the appellate and trial courts conform to those standards. Please note that this proposed administrative order is part of a group of documents in this file that has been published for comment, including proposed videoconferencing rules that would amend MCR 3.210, 3.215, and 6.104, and would adopt MCR 8.124, a new rule, and draft videoconferencing standards, which are attached at the end of that order.
SBM Position: Support.

2013-20 - Proposed Amendment of Rule 2.305 of the Michigan Court Rules
The proposed changes of MCR 2.305 would make subrule (E) applicable only to actions pending in another country, while new subrule (F) would cross reference the Uniform Interstate Depositions and Discovery Act, which establishes the procedures to be used in seeking a deposition or discovery subpoena in Michigan for use in an action that is pending in another state or territory.
SBM Position: Support with Amendment.
Family Law Section Position: Support.

2013-24 – Proposed Rescission of Administrative Order No. 2011-3 and Proposed Adoption of Administrative Order No. 2013-___
Proposed Administrative Order 2013-___ would rescind Administrative Order No. 2011-3 and update the guidelines found in that order. The updates would revise the guidelines to make them more reflective of disposition rates based on statewide court data and to accommodate the fact that there may be delay in any case type that would make 100 percent disposition nearly impossible. However, the 100 percent disposition expectation would remain in place for PPO cases.
SBM Position: Support.

Rule Amendments
2012-03 - Adoption of Rule 1.111 and Rule 8.127 of the Michigan Court Rules and Rescission of Rule 2.507(D) of the Michigan Court Rules
Issued: September 11, 2013
Effective: Immediately

2012-03 - Adoption of Administrative Order No. 2013-8
Issued: September 11, 2013
Effective: Within 90 days of the date of this order

At the Bar
The State Bar of Michigan’s Public Policy, Image, and Identity Committee and Board of Commissioners will meet Wednesday, September 18. For more information, please contact pcunningham@mail.michbar.org.

The September2013 issue of the Michigan Bar Journal is now available online.

State Bar of Michigan Calls for Halt to Secret Funding of Judicial Campaign Ads
See also:
State Bar of Michigan Calls for Halt to Secret Funding of Judicial Campaign Ads
(Mlive.com, 9/13/13)
State Bar Asks for Reversal of Disclosure Rule
(Michigan Radio, 9/13/13)
Michigan Bar Seeks to Drag Dark Money out of the Shadows
(Detroit Free Press, 9/12/13)                  
Good News in the Michigan Supreme Court
(Michigan Radio, 9/12/13)
State Bar Calls on Michigan Secretary of State Ruth Johnson to Ban ‘Secret Funding’ in Judicial Elections
(Mlive.com, 9/12/13)
State Bar Requests Disclosure of ‘Issue’ Spending Donors in Judicial Races
(Detroit News, 9/12/13)
State Bar of Michigan Wants to End Secret Judicial Campaign Ads
(Lansing State Journal, 9/12/13)

SBM Paralegal/Legal Assistant Section to Meet, Present Scholarships, Offer Seminar at Annual Meeting in Lansing

Links of Interest
Public Policy Resource Center | Michigan Supreme Court | Michigan Legislature | MCL Search Engines