Amendments to SCAO forms

This page is where the amendments are found.

An example:

MC 326, Notice of Hearing and Motion: Several court employees have questioned the need for a proof of service on this form. The proof of service was added in 2005, but there is no background on the reason for including it. It is suggested the proof of service be removed. If it is not removed, it should be amended to comply with the standards set forth in MCR 2.107, and not MCR 2.105.

Limits on appeal briefs

Admin no.: 2009-14
Date: February 2, 2010
Effective: May 1, 2010
Rules affected: 7.101 and 7.105

These rules were amended to apply the 50-page limit on briefs to appeals to the circuit court from a judgment of the district court, and to appeals to the Court of Appeals from a decision of a state agency, board, or commission.

Link

Federal: reining in juries during trial

The Committee On Court Administration And Case Management of the Judicial Conference Of The United States has issued a new recommended jury instruction on "Juror Use Of Electronic Communication Technologies".

The recommended instruction before proofs begin:

"You, as jurors, must decide this case based solely on the evidence presented here within the four walls of this courtroom. This means that during the trial you must not conduct any independent research about this case, the matters in the case, and the individuals or corporations involved in the case. In other words, you should not consult dictionaries or reference materials, search the internet, websites, blogs, or use any other electronic tools to obtain information about this case or to help you decide the case. Please do not try to find out information from any source outside the confines of this courtroom.

"Until you retire to deliberate, you may not discuss this case with anyone, even your fellow jurors. After you retire to deliberate, you may begin discussing the case with your fellow jurors, but you cannot discuss the case with anyone else until you have returned a verdict and the case is at an end. I hope that for all of you this case is interesting and noteworthy. I know that many of you use cell phones, Blackberries, the internet and other tools of technology. You also must not talk to anyone about this case or use these tools to communicate electronically with anyone about the case. This includes your family and friends. You may not communicate with anyone about the case on your cell phone, through e-mail, Blackberry, iPhone, text messaging, or on Twitter, through any blog or website, through any internet chat room, or by way of any other social networking websites, including Facebook, My Space, LinkedIn, and YouTube."

And at the close of proofs, just before deliberations:

"During your deliberations, you must not communicate with or provide any information to anyone by any means about this case. You may not use any electronic device or media, such as a telephone, cell phone, smart phone, iPhone, Blackberry or computer; the internet, any internet service, or any text or instant messaging service; or any internet chat room, blog, or website such as Facebook, My Space, LinkedIn, YouTube or Twitter, to communicate to anyone any information about this case or to conduct any research about this case until I accept your verdict."

Rules of professional conduct

Adm no. - 2009-06
Issued - 11-24-09
Covers - several rules under MRPC

A continuation of a previous series of proposals from 2004. Changes, some with alternatives, are proposed to rules dealing with fees, conflict of interest, service as mediator or arbitrator, truthfulness of statements made to the court, public statements during proceedings, and practice by lawyers admitted in other states. It includes a new proposal to allow disciplinary action against a Michigan-licensed lawyer for actions in other states.

Link to proposal

Appeals - materials under seal

Adm no. - 2009-18
Rules affected - 7.211, 7.313, 8.119
Date entered - November 13, 2009
Comments open to - March 1, 2010

At both the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court levels, a new provision that materials that are the subject of a pending motion to seal the record shall be held under seal until the court makes its ruling on the motion.

Newly adopted items

Disqualification of Supreme Court justices
Use of electronic equipment in courtrooms

Confidentiality - mediation

Court rule affected - MCR 2.412 (new rule)
Admin no. - n/a
Issued - 10-28-09
Comments open to - 2-1-10

See later item regarding adoption

This one comes directly from the SCAO's Mediation Confidentiality and Standards of Conduct Committee, rather than from the Supreme Court. The new proposed rule would continue the general rule that "mediation communications" are not admissible in evidence or subject to discovery, but would add a series of exceptions, including disclosures

• necessary to resolve disputes regarding the mediator's fee
  
• necessary to resolve issues regarding a party's failure to appear
  
• making threats of committing a crime, or concealing a crime
  
• "indicating the likelihood" of abuse of a child, an elderly person, or a protected person
  
• relating to claims of professional negligence on the part of a participant
• relating to proceedings to enforce a settlement agreement (qualified immunity)

Link to the proposal (PDF)