Opinion
00-15.
April 3, 2001.
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 3.210 of the Michigan Court Rules is adopted, to be effective July 1, 2001. The Court declines to adopt the proposed amendment of Rule 2.119, which was published at 463 Mich. 1202 (No. 2, 2000).
[The present language is amended as indicated below.]
Rule 3.210 Hearings and Trials
(A) — (B) [Unchanged.]
(C) Custody of a Minor.
(1) — (6) [Unchanged.]
(7) In deciding whether an evidentiary hearing is necessary with regard to a postjudgment motion to change custody, the court must determine, by requiring an offer of proof or otherwise, whether there are contested factual issues that must be resolved in order for the court to make an informed decision on the motion.
(D) [Unchanged.]
Staff Comment: The April 3, 2001 amendment of Rule 3.210, effective July 1, 2001, was based on a recommendation from the Michigan Judges Association and made clear that, in deciding whether an evidentiary hearing is necessary, the court must first determine whether there are contested factual issues that must be resolved in order to make an informed decision.
The staff comment is published only for the benefit of the bench and bar and is not an authoritative construction by the Court.