From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Proposed Amendment of Rules 3.210 2.119

Supreme Court of Michigan
Sep 12, 2000
463 Mich. 1202 (Mich. 2000)

Opinion

No. 00-15

September 12, 2000.


On order of the Court, this is to advise that the Court is considering an amendment of Rule 2.119 and Rule 3.210 of the Michigan Court Rules. The amendments are based on a proposal from the Michigan Judges Association. Before determining whether the proposal should be adopted, changed before adoption, or rejected, this notice is given to afford any interested person the opportunity to comment on the form or the merits of the proposal. We welcome the views of all who wish to address the proposal or who wish to suggest alternatives. Before adoption or rejection, this proposal will be considered at a public hearing by the Court. The Clerk of the Court will publish a schedule of future public hearings.

As whenever this Court publishes an administrative proposal for comment, we emphasize that publication of this proposal does not mean that the Court will issue an order on the subject, nor does it imply probable adoption of the proposal in its present form.

[The present language would be amended as indicated below.]

Rule 2.119 Motion Practice

(A)(D) [Unchanged.]

(E) Contested Motions.

(1) [Unchanged.]

(2) When a motion is based on facts not appearing of record, the court may hear the motion on affidavits presented by the parties, or may direct that the motion be heard wholly or partly on oral testimony or deposition. In deciding whether an evidentiary hearing is necessary, the court must first determine, by requiring an offer of proof or otherwise, whether there are contested factual issues that must be resolved in order to make an informed decision on the motion.

(3) — (4) [Unchanged.

(F)(G) [Unchanged.]

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 first 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 proposed amendments of MCR 2.119 and MCR 3.210 are based on a recommendation from the Michigan Judges Association.

The staff comment is published only for the benefit of the bench and bar and is not an authoritative construction by the Court.

Publication of this proposal does not mean that the Court will issue an order on the subject, nor does it imply probable adoption in its present form. Timely comments will be substantively considered, and your assistance is appreciated by the Court.

A copy of this order will be given to the secretary of the State Bar and to the State Court Administrator so that they can make the notifications specified in MCR 1.201. Comments on this proposal may be sent to the Supreme Court clerk by January 1, 2001. When filing a comment, please refer to our file No. 00-15.


Summaries of

In re Proposed Amendment of Rules 3.210 2.119

Supreme Court of Michigan
Sep 12, 2000
463 Mich. 1202 (Mich. 2000)
Case details for

In re Proposed Amendment of Rules 3.210 2.119

Case Details

Full title:Proposed Amendment of Rules 3.210 and 2.119 of the Michigan Court Rules

Court:Supreme Court of Michigan

Date published: Sep 12, 2000

Citations

463 Mich. 1202 (Mich. 2000)