June 15, 2020
Volume 18, Issue 24
At the Capitol
6/17 House Judiciary, 10:30 a.m. MORE
HB 5551 (Julie Alexander) Vehicles; snowmobiles; improper display of registration decal; decriminalize.
HB 5607 (Graham Filler) Crimes; crimes against minors; dissemination or possession of sexually explicit visual material by minors under certain circumstances; prohibit, and provide penalties.
HB 5608 (Vanessa Guerra) Criminal procedure; sentencing guidelines; sentencing guidelines for dissemination or possession of sexually explicit visual material by minors under certain circumstances; provide for.
HB 5684 (John Cherry) Vehicles; snowmobiles; noncompliance to provide a certificate of registration; decriminalize.
HB 5685 (Tim Sneller) Vehicles; registration; failure to properly register, transfer title, or obtain plates on vehicles; modify penalties.
HB 5686 (Annette Glenn) Vehicles; registration; penalties for uses of certain farm-related vehicles that violate certain registration requirements; provide for.
HB 5687 (Beau LaFave) Watercraft; safety; failure to exhibit safety certificate; decriminalize.
HB 5688 (David LaGrand) Vehicles; registration plates; penalties for invalid or improper registration plates; modify.
HB 5689 (Beau LaFave) Vehicles; snowmobiles; reckless operation of a snowmobile; decriminalize.
HB 5690 (David LaGrand) Traffic control; driver license; penalties for violations of temporary instruction permit; modify.
HB 5691 (Graham Filler) Vehicles; registration plates; penalties for unauthorized use of dealer plates; modify.
HB 5692 (Gregory Markkanen) Vehicles; snowmobiles; safety standards for snowmobiles; decriminalize.
HB 5693 (Beau LaFave) Vehicles; off-road; improperly crossing road or street; decriminalize.
HB 5694 (Steven Johnson) Natural resources; fishing; penalties for certain hunting and fishing licensing violations; modify.
HB 5695 (Mike Mueller) Natural resources; fishing; penalties for certain fishing violations; modify.
HB 5696 (Ronnie Peterson) Transportation; motor carrier fuel tax; motor carrier fuel tax act; modify penalties.
HB 5697 (Gary Howell) Natural resources; hunting; penalties for violations of certain hunting provisions; modify.
HB 5698 (Kyra Bolden) Vehicles; registration; penalties for violations of moped registration fees; modify.
HB 5699 (Tenisha Yancey) Traffic control; violations; penalty for failure to provide proof of license or other receipt while operating a vehicle; modify.
HB 5802 (Mike Mueller) Traffic control; driver license; penalties for driving on suspended license; modify.
HB 5803 (Kyra Bolden) Traffic control; violations; reporting requirements for misdemeanor conviction; eliminate.
HB 5804 (Gary Howell) Traffic control; violations; collection of biometric data for traffic violation; eliminate.
HB 5837 (Ronnie Peterson) Law enforcement; training; mental health and law enforcement response training; require for law enforcement officers.
SB 945 (Jeff Irwin) Law enforcement; training; mental health and law enforcement response training; require for law enforcement officers.
Legislative Action Last Week:
Summary of legislative action on all bills that the State Bar or sections of the State Bar have taken positions.
HB 4378 (Freedom of Information Act, Identity of Parties Proceeding Anonymously in Civil Actions) was reassigned to the Senate Committee on Judiciary & Public Safety.
SBM Position on HB 4378: Support with an amendment that the exemptions set forth in the bill also apply to survivors of human trafficking.
HB 5795 (Estate & Protected Individuals Code, Electronic Signature of Wills) is expected to be reported out of the House Committee on Judiciary as substitute H-1.
Elder Law & Disability Rights Section on HB 5795: Oppose.
Probate & Estate Planning Section on HB 5795: Oppose.
SB 77 (Public Health Code, Electronic Monitoring Devices in Nursing Homes) is expected to be reported out of the Senate Committee on Healthy Policy & Human Services as substitute S-2.
Elder Law & Disability Rights Section on SB 77: Support.
Legislation Introduced 6/9–6/11
This week bills were introduced in the following areas of law:
At the Court
ADM File No. 2020-08: Administrative Order No. 2020-17: Priority Treatment and New Procedure for Landlord/Tenant Cases (with accompanying Guidance and forms: Consent Order for Conditional Dismissal (DC 508) and Order for Reinstatement of Case and Entry of Judgment (DC 509)
ADM File No. 2020-08: Administrative Order No. 2020-18 (Order Resuming Usual Computation of Days for Determination of Deadlines Applicable to the Commencement of Civil and Probate Actions)
ADM File No. 2020-11: Proposed Amendment of MCR 2.108
The proposed amendment of MCR 2.108 would provide a timeframe for a responsive pleading when a motion for more definite statement is denied.
Comment Period Expires: 10/1/20
ADM File No. 2020-14: Amendment of MCR 4.202
The amendment of MCR 4.202(H) makes the rule consistent with the requirements of MCR 4.201(F)(4) by requiring the court clerk to mail defendant notice of entry of a default judgment. The rule was amended previously to require plaintiff to mail a default judgment to the defendant, unlike MCR 4.201(F)(4), which was not amended. Having two different procedures for matters that are both summary proceedings has caused confusion for courts. This amendment returns the language to its previous status and makes MCR 4.201 and MCR 4.202 consistent again.
Comment Period Expires: 10/1/20
ADM File No. 2020-01: Appointment of Chief Judge of the 29th District Court (Wayne County)
At the Bar
In Memoriam: John A. Krsul, 48th SBM President
Jonathan B. Frank: Making Litigation More Efficient and Less Expensive in the Post-COVID World and Beyond
Stephen R. Estey, Lauren A. Evers, and Peter M. Grace: Virtual Reality—Navigating Land Use and Zoning Decisions in the COVID-19 Era
Judicial Vacancy—Ogemaw County
Voting Ends Soon in the 2020 State Bar Election
The Board of Commissioners met on June 12, 2020 at which time the State Bar of Michigan adopted the following public policy positions:
ADM File No. 2020-06: Proposed Amendments of MCR 2.403, 2.404, and 2.405
The proposed amendments were in large part produced by a workgroup convened by the State Court Administrative Office to review and offer recommendations about case evaluation.
SBM Position: Support.
ADM File No. 2015-21: Proposed Amendments of MCR 3.971, 3.972, 3.973, 3.977, 3.993, 7.202, and 7.204
The proposed amendments of MCR 3.971, 3.972, 3.973, 3.977, 3.993, 7.202 and 7.204 would make the appeal process for child protective cases uniform (instead of having a separate process for cases involving termination of parental rights). The amendments also would make the appeal period uniform (21 days) for all child protections cases.
SBM Position: Support ADM File No. 2015-21 with the amendment that would retain the language in the current MCR 7.204 (A)(1) that allows trial courts to extend the 21-day period of appeal if during those 21 days, the trial court finds “good cause” for doing so.
ADM File No. 2019-27: Proposed Amendments of MCR 6.310, 6.429, 6.431, 6.509, and 7.205 and Proposed Addition of MCR 6.126
The proposed amendments of MCR 6.310, 6.429, 6.431, 6.509, and 7.205 and proposed addition of MCR 6.126 would clarify and simplify the rules regarding procedure in criminal appellate matters.
SBM Position: Support new rule 6.126 and proposed amendments to MCR 6.310, 6.429, 6.431, 6.509.
Support MCR 7.205 (A)(4)(b) with the amendment proposed by the Michigan Coalition of Family Law Appellate Attorneys that “a delayed application for leave to appeal may be filed within the later of 6 months from entry of the order appealed, 21 days after entry of the dismissal order, or 21 days after entry of an order denying reconsideration of the dismissal order . . . . “
ADM File Nos. 2018-33/2019-20/2019-38: Proposed Amendments of MCR 6.310, 6.425, 6.428, 6.429, 6.431, 7.204, 7.205, 7.208, 7.211, 7.305, and Proposed Addition of MCR 1.112
The proposed amendments were submitted by the State Appellate Defender Office and would address several issues. First, it would expand the prisoner mailbox rule to all legal filings (not just claims of appeal and postjudgment motions) made by a person incarcerated in prison or jail (not just prison, as under the current rule). This part of the proposal includes a new MCR 1.112, and elimination of specific prison mailbox provisions in MCR 6.310(C)(5), MCR 6.429(B)(5), MCR 6.431(A)(5), MCR 7.204(A)(2)(e), MCR 7.205(A)(3), and MCR 7.305(C)(5). One difficulty with this expansion is the fact that most jails do not have a mail log system like that in place in prisons. Second, the proposal would expand certain time frames for filing and deciding postjudgment motions in criminal cases, as reflected in the amendments of MCR 7.208 and MCR 7.211. Third, the proposal would reconfigure and expand the “Reissuance of Judgment” rule, as shown in the proposed amendments of MCR 6.428. Finally, the proposal (as shown in proposed amendments of MCR 6.425) would require a probation officer to give defendant’s attorney notion and a reasonable opportunity to attend the presentence interview, require a probation agent to not only correct a report but certify that the correction has been made, and “ensure that no prior version of the report is used for classification, programming, or parole purposes.” This portion of the proposal also would require the Michigan Department of Corrections to provide the prosecutor, defendant, or defense lawyer with a copy of the presentence investigation report, and further require the court to provide to the parties any documents presented for consideration at sentencing, including any PSIR considered before corrections were made
SBM Position: Support MCR 1.112, MCR 6.310(C)(5), MCR 6.429(B)(5), MCR 6.431(A)(5), MCR 7.204(A)(2)(e), MCR 7.205(A)(3), and MCR 7.305(C)(5).
Support new rule 1.112 with an amendment that would limit the rule so that it would apply only upon the “trigger” of an untimely pleading having been submitted by an unrepresented individual who is incarcerated at the time of submitting the pleading, when the pleading deemed untimely would result in the individual submitting the pleading losing a right..
Support the proposed amendments to MCR 6.425, MCR 6.428, MCR 7.208, and 7.211.
ADM File No. 2019-29: Proposed Amendments of MCR 7.212 and 7.312
The proposed amendments of MCR 7.212 and 7.312 would allow practitioners to efficiently produce an appendix for all appellate purposes by making the appendix rule consistent within the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court.
SBM Position: Support this rule change in so for as it would make the appendix rule consistent within the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court and recommend asking the Court to consider whether the exclusions as currently proposed in MCR 7.212(J)(1)(a)-(f) for the Court of Appeals should also apply to the Supreme Court.
ADM File No. 2019-31: Proposed Amendment of MCR 7.216
The proposed amendment of MCR 7.216 would enable the Court of Appeals to impose filing restrictions on a vexatious litigator, similar to the Supreme Court’s rule (MCR 7.316).
SBM Position: Support with an amendment to ensure symmetry between the vexatious litigator rules and definitions in the Court of Appeals and in the Supreme Court:
Rule 7.216(C)(1)(a) the appeal was taken for purposes of hindrance or delay or is not reasonably well-grounded in fact or warranted by existing law or a good-faith argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law;
or belief that there was a meritorious issue to be determined on appeal;
ADM File No. 2019-26: Proposed Amendment of MCR 7.314
The proposed amendment of MCR 7.314 would eliminate the oral argument time period and instead provide for an amount of time established by the Court in the order granting leave to appeal.
SBM Position: Support.
ADM File No. 2020-03: Proposed Administrative Order Regarding Election-Related Litigation
This administrative order would provide requirements and procedural rules to promote the efficient and timely disposition of election-related litigation.
SBM Position: Support.
Links of Interest
SBM Public Policy Resource Center
Michigan Supreme Court
MCL Search Engines