ADM File No. 2023-08 Retention of the Amendment of Rule 7.202 of the Michigan Court Rules
On order of the Court, notice of the proposed changes and an opportunity for comment in writing and at a public hearing having been provided, and consideration having been given to the comments received, the April 20, 2023, amendment of Rule 7.202 of the Michigan Court Rules is retained.
ADM File No. 2017-28 Amendments of Rules 1.109, 5.302, and 8.108 of the Michigan Court Rules
On order of the Court, notice of the proposed changes and an opportunity for comment in writing and at a public hearing having been provided, and consideration having been given to the comments received, the following amendments of Rules 1.109, 5.302, and 8.108 of the Michigan Court Rules are adopted, effective Jan. 1, 2024.
[Additions to the text are indicated in underlining and deleted text is shown by strikeover.]
Rule 1.109 Court Records Defined; Document Defined; Filing Standards; Signatures; Electronic Filing and Service; Access
(A)-(C) [Unchanged.]
(D) Filing Standards.
(1)-(9) [Unchanged.]
(10) Request for Copy of Public Document with Protected Personal Identifying Information; Redacting Personal Identifying Information; Responsibility; Certifying Original Record; Other.
(a)-(b) [Unchanged.]
(c) Redacting Personal Identifying Information.
(i)-(iii) [Unchanged.]
(iv) Unredacted protected personal identifying information may be included on transcripts filed with the court but must be redacted by the clerk of the court pursuant to a written request submitted under MCR 1.109(D)(10)(c)(i). The written request must identify the page and line number for each place in the transcript where the protected information is located.
(d)-(e) [Unchanged.]
(11) [Unchanged.]
(E)-(H) [Unchanged.]
Rule 5.302 Commencement of Decedent Estates
(A) Methods of Commencement. A decedent estate may be commenced by filing an application for an informal proceeding or a petition for a formal testacy proceeding. A request for supervised administration may be made in a petition for a formal testacy proceeding.
(1) When filing either an application or petition to commence a decedent estate, twoa copiesy of the death certificate must be filed with the application or petitionattached. If the death certificate is not available, the petitioner may file two copies ofprovide alternative documentation of the decedent’s death. In either instance, the petitioner must redact from one of the copies being filed all protected personal identifying information as required by MCR 1.109(D)(9). The unredacted copy of the death certificate or alternative documentation must be maintained by the court as a nonpublic record.
(2) If a will that is being filed with the court for the purposes of commencing an estate contains protected personal identifying information, the filer must provide the will being filed for probate and a copy that has the protected personal identifying information redacted as required by MCR 1.109(D)(9). The unredacted version of the will must be maintained by the court as a nonpublic record.
(2)-(3) [Renumbered (3)-(4) but otherwise unchanged.]
(B)-(D) [Unchanged.]
Rule 8.108 Court Reporters and Recorders
(A)-(E) [Unchanged.]
(F) Filing Transcript.
(1)-(2) [Unchanged.]
(3) Unless notice has been previously provided under a different rule, immediately after the transcript is filed, the court reporter or recorder must notify the court and all parties that it has been filed and file in the court an affidavit of mailing of notice to the parties.
(G) [Unchanged.]
Staff Comment (ADM File No. 2017-28): The amendments of MCR 1.109, 5.302, and 8.108 provide direction on the process for protecting personal identifying information in transcripts, wills, and death certificates.
The staff comment is not an authoritative construction by the Court. In addition, adoption of a new rule or amendment in no way reflects a substantive determination by this Court.
ADM File No. 2022-14 Amendment of Rule 2.311 of the Michigan Court Rules
On order of the Court, notice of the proposed changes and an opportunity for comment in writing and at a public hearing having been provided, and consideration having been given to the comments received, the following amendment of Rule 2.311 of the Michigan Court Rules is adopted, effective Jan. 1, 2024.
[Additions to the text are indicated in underlining and deleted text is shown by strikeover.]
Rule 2.311 Physical and Mental Examination of Persons
(A) Order for Examination. When the mental or physical condition (including the blood group) of a party, or of a person in the custody or under the legal control of a party, is in controversy, the court in which the action is pending may order the party to submit to a physical or mental or blood examination by a physician (or other appropriate professional) or to produce for examination the person in the party’s custody or legal control. The order may be entered only on motion for good cause with notice to the person to be examined and to all parties. The order must specify the time, place, manner, conditions, and scope of the examination and the person or persons by whom it is to be made., Upon request of a party, the orderand may also provide that
(1) the attorney for the person to be examined may be present at the examination, or
(2) a mental examination be recorded by video or audio.
(B) If the court orders that a mental examination be recorded, the recording must
(1) be unobtrusive,
(2) capture the examinee’s and the examiner’s conduct throughout the examination, and
(3) be filed under seal.
(B) [Relettered (C) but otherwise unchanged.]
Staff Comment (ADM File No. 2022-14): The amendment of MCR 2.311 allows a mental examination to be recorded by video or audio under certain circumstances.
The staff comment is not an authoritative construction by the Court. In addition, adoption of a new rule or amendment in no way reflects a substantive determination by this Court.
ADM File No. 2023-28 Appointment of Chief Judge of the Grosse Pointe Municipal Court
On order of the Court, effective immediately, Hon. David R. Draper is appointed as chief judge of the Grosse Pointe Municipal Court for the remainder of a term ending Dec. 31, 2023, and for a two-year term commencing on Jan. 1, 2024, and ending on Dec. 31, 2025.
ADM File No. 2023-01 Appointments to the Commission on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Michigan Judiciary
On order of the Court, pursuant to Administrative Order No. 2022- 1, Justice Elizabeth M. Welch and Judge Austin W. Garrett are appointed as co-chairs on the Commission on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Michigan Judiciary, effective Jan. 1, 2024.
Welch, J. (concurring). On Jan. 5, 2022, we issued Administrative Order No. 2022-1, which created the Commission on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Michigan Judiciary (the Commission). The Commission’s stated purpose is “to assess and work towards elimination of demographic and other disparities within the Michigan judiciary and justice system.” Administrative Order No. 2022- 1, 508 Mich ___ (Jan. 5, 2022). In addition to setting forth various goals for the Commission, AO 2022-1 also established the executive leadership of the Commission and outlined the process for selection of the commissioners.
Within 120 days, as required by AO 2022-1(IV)(B)(3) and following a robust selection process, the Commission’s leadership recommended the appointment of the remaining commissioners. This Court did not, however, make those appointments until June 16, 2022. See Appointments to the Commission on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Michigan Judiciary, 509 Mich ___ (June 16, 2022). AO 2022-1 required the Commission to “work with an expert facilitator to develop a strategic plan to guide the initial work of the Commission.” AO 2022-1(II). Accordingly, the Commission’s leadership researched and selected a strategic planner with broad experience working with governmental entities and court systems. In keeping with the planning process agreed to by the Commissioners, throughout 2023 Commission members have convened for four hours each month and additionally met in smaller work groups on a regular basis. The Commission has remained true to its agreed-to timeline; a draft plan is now complete and will soon be available for the public to review.
I thank my co-chair, Judge Cynthia Stephens (now retired), for her leadership on the Commission and her years of dedication to this important work. I also thank all the Commissioners for their incredible dedication this past year as they devoted countless hours to the strategic planning process. I look forward to working with Judge Austin Garrett and the Commission in the years ahead as the objectives set forth in the strategic plan are implemented.
Viviano, J. (dissenting). I maintain my previously expressed objections to the existence of the Commission on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Michigan Judiciary. See Administrative Order No. 2022-1, 508 Mich ___, ___ (Jan. 5, 2022) (Viviano, J., dissenting). Nearly two years after it was created, the Commission still has not defined these key terms or outlined its mission and goals. As I have noted previously, any definition of these terms that would require or encourage the judiciary to engage in unlawful discriminatory practices would certainly place judges and court administrators in an untenable position. See id. at ___ (“If the Commission created today sets about to encourage the judiciary to consider [race, gender, or other protected personal characteristics] in any area under our purview, I fear that our ethics, fidelity to law, and impartiality will justly be called into question”). The United States Supreme Court recently reaffirmed the need for neutral decision-making, striking down the use of race in college admissions programs. Students for Fair Admissions, Inc v President & Fellows of Harvard College, 600 US 181, 230 (2023). The Court’s reasoning has potential ramifications far outside the educational setting. See id. at 287-291 (Gorsuch, J., concurring) (explaining that the schools’ actions would be unlawful under terms in the Civil Rights Act that apply broadly to various types of entities).
As I indicated when the Court made its initial appointments to the Commission, assessing the applicants is difficult without knowing what the Commission stands for and whether the applicants will serve as a group dedicated to removing obstacles to participation in the courts and fostering viewpoint diversity or a group that will advocate for the unconstitutional use of race and other protected char acteristics in the courts’ decision-making processes. See Appointments to the Commission on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Michigan Judiciary, 509 Mich ___, ___ (June 16, 2022) (Viviano, J., dissenting). Thus, while I have no objection to the individuals appointed as co-chairs, at least until we receive more clarity regarding its aims, I remain opposed to the existence of the Commission and respectfully dissent.
ADM File No. 2023-05 Amendment of Rule 3.613 of the Michigan Court Rules
On order of the Court, notice of the proposed changes and an opportunity for comment in writing and at a public hearing having been provided, and consideration having been given to the comments received, the following amendment of Rule 3.613 of the Michigan Court Rules is adopted, effective Jan. 1, 2024.
[Additions to the text are indicated in underlining and deleted text is shown by strikeover.]
Rule 3.613 Change of Name
(A) [Unchanged.]
(B) Published Notice; Contents. Unless otherwise provided in this rule, the court must order publication of the notice of the proceeding to change a name in a newspaper in the county where the action is pending. If the court has waived fees under MCR 2.002, it must pay the cost of any ordered publication, including any affidavit fee charged by the publisher or the publisher’s agent for preparing the affidavit pursuant to MCR 2.106(G). Any case record reflecting court payment must be nonpublic. A published notice of a proceeding to change a name must include the name of the petitioner; the current name of the subject of the petition; the proposed name; and the time, date, and place of the hearing. Proof of service must be made as provided by MCR 2.106(G)(1).
(C)-(G) [Unchanged.]
Staff Comment (ADM File No. 2023-05): The amendment of MCR 3.613 requires a court to pay the costs of publication in a name change proceeding if fees are waived under MCR 2.002 and ensures that any case record reflecting the court payment be made nonpublic.
The staff comment is not an authoritative construction by the Court. In addition, adoption of a new rule or amendment in no way reflects a substantive determination by this Court.