July 27, 2018
Board of Commissioners
Public Policy Items To Be Considered
Members who wish to share comments on any of the items below may do so by filling out a Public Policy Comment form or emailing firstname.lastname@example.org before 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, July 26.
A. Court Rules
1. ADM File No. 2018-03: Proposed Amendments of Rules 3.201, 3.210, and 3.211 and Proposed Addition of Rule 3.222 and 3.223 of the Michigan Court Rules
The proposed amendments of MCR 3.201, 3.210, and 3.211 and proposed addition of MCR 3.222 and 3.223 would integrate the collaborate law process designed under the Uniform Collaborate Law Act (159 PA 2014; MCL 691.1331-691.1354) into the state’s trial court system for practical use, and would add a similar process for parties not represented by counsel who seek to submit a consent judgment.
2. ADM File No. 2002-37/2018-20: Proposed Amendment of Rule 2.002 of the Michigan Court Rules
The Court is considering two different proposals regarding fee waivers for indigent individuals. Alternative A is a version prepared internally in anticipation of implementation of a statewide e-Filing system. Alternative B is a proposal submitted by the State Bar of Michigan. The two versions are similar in some respects, but have significant differences. For example, the Bar’s version would establish a standard for indigency as living in a household whose gross household income is under 200% of the federal poverty level, would create a status of “financial hardship,” would allow the court to conduct further inquiries if necessary to determine whether a party is indigent, and would create a right to request a hearing if a petition for indigency is denied. The alternative version does not include such provisions.
3. ADM File No. 2017-16: Proposed Amendment of Rule 6.302 of the Michigan Court Rules
The proposed amendment of MCR 6.302 would require a trial court judge to advise a defendant that if a plea is accepted, the defendant will give up the right to appeal issues that might have been available after the conclusion of a trial.
4. ADM File No. 2013-05/2014-46: Proposed Amendment of Rule 6.502 of the Michigan Court Rules and Rule 3.8 of the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct
The proposed amendments would make several substantive changes in MCR 6.502 regarding postjudgment relief from judgment motions. First, the proposed new language in MCR 6.502(G)(2) would insert an “actual innocence” waiver provision similar to that in MCR 6.508(D)(3). Further, MCR 6.502(G)(3) would be added to clarify that shifts in science are included in the definition of “new evidence” for purposes of the exemption from the successive motion limitation. Finally, new language would be added to MRPC 3.8 to require certain actions by a prosecutor who knows of new, credible, and material evidence creating a reasonable likelihood that defendant did not commit the offense of which defendant was convicted, or who knows of clear and convincing evidence that shows defendant did not commit the offense. The proposed additional language of MRPC 3.8 is taken from the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct 3.8.
5. ADM File No. 2017-20: Proposed Amendment of Rule 7.202 of the Michigan Court Rules
The proposed amendment of MCR 7.202 clarifies what constitutes a final postjudgment order in a domestic relations case for purposes of appeal by right. This issue was raised in Marik v. Marik, docket 154549, during oral arguments held earlier this term.
6. ADM File No. 2017-29: Proposed Amendment of Rule 4.4 of the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct
The proposed amendment of MRPC 4.4 would define the responsibilities of a lawyer who receives a document that was inadvertently sent. This proposal was submitted by the State Bar of Michigan. Note that the Court adopted MCR 2.302(B)(7) in 2008 to address the issue of discovery material inadvertently transmitted, and that rule requires the inadvertent recipient to return or destroy the alleged protected material, and may promptly submit the material to the trial court for a determination of the claim. To the extent that the final paragraph of the proposed new comment language apparently leaves such a decision to the discretion of the lawyer, this proposed new language may conflict (or at least exist in tension) with the existing language in MCR 2.302(B)(7).
7. ADM File No. 2017-25: Proposed Amendment of Rule 7.1 of the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct
The proposed amendment of MRPC 7.1 would restrict and regulate the use of the terms “retired” or “former” for a justice, judge, referee, or magistrate who returns to the practice of law. This proposal is a narrower version than one submitted by the State Bar of Michigan Representative Assembly.
1. HB 5386 (LaSata) Human services; other; eligibility requirements for Medicaid and supplemental nutrition assistance (SNAP) programs; enhance. Creates new act.
2. HB 5396 (Lucido) Civil procedure; evictions; proceedings to recover possession of premises because of assault, battery, or unlawful drugs; modify to require a conviction. Amends sec. 5714 of 1961 PA 236 (MCL 600.5714).
3. HB 6096 (Lucido) Property; other; entry by owner to evict; modify process. Amends sec. 2918 of 1961 PA 236 (MCL 600.2918).
4. Jurisdiction for Prosecution
SB 0951 (Gregory) Criminal procedure; jurisdiction; jurisdiction for prosecution for delivery of a controlled substance causing death; modify. Amends 1927 PA 175 (MCL 760.1 - 777.69) by adding sec. 5a to ch. II.
SB 0952 (Zorn) Criminal procedure; jurisdiction; venue for prosecution of delivery of a controlled substance causing death; modify. Amends sec. 317a of 1931 PA 328 (MCL 750.317a).
1. “A Way Forward: Transparency in 2018” by Law School Transparency (Iowa State Bar Association Young Lawyers Division)