99-65.Supreme Court of Michigan.
October 1, 2001.
On order of the Court, this is to advise that the Court is considering amendments of Rules 2.309, 2.310, and 2.312 of the Michigan Court Rules. Before determining whether the proposal should be adopted, changed before adoption, or rejected, this notice is given to afford interested persons the opportunity to comment on the form or the merits of the proposal. The Court welcomes the views of all who wish to address the proposal or to suggest alternatives. Before adoption or rejection, the proposal will be considered at a public hearing by the Court. Notice of future public hearings will be provided by the Clerk of the Court and posted on the Court’s website, www.supremecourt.state.mi.us.
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 2.309 Interrogatories to Parties
(A)-(B) [Unchanged.]
(C) Motion to Compel Answers. The party submitting the interrogatories may move for an order under MCR 2.313(A) with respect to an objection to or other failure to answer an interrogatory. If the motion is based on the failure to serve answers, proof of service of the interrogatories must be filed with the motion. The motion must include a certified statement that the movant has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer with the party not making the disclosure in an effort to secure the disclosure without court action.
(D)-(E) [Unchanged.]
Rule 2.310 Requests for Production of Documents and Other Things; Entry on Land for Inspection and Other Purposes
(A)-(B) [Unchanged.]
(C) Request to Party.
(1)-(2) [Unchanged.]
(3) The party submitting the request may move for an order under MCR 2.313(A) with respect to an objection to or a failure to respond to the request or a part of it, or failure to permit inspection as requested. If the
Page 1206
motion is based on a failure to respond to a request, proof of service of the request must be filed with the motion. The motion must include acertified statement that the movant has in good faith conferred orattempted to confer with the party not making the disclosure in an effortto secure the disclosure without court action.
(4)-(5) [Unchanged.]
[Unchanged.](6) Unless otherwise ordered by the court for good cause, the expense of producing items will be borne by the responding party and the expense of inspecting, sampling, testing, photographing, and copying items produced will be borne by the requesting party.
Rule 2.312 Request for Admission
(A)-(B) [Unchanged.]
(C) Motion Regarding Answer or Objection. The motion must include a certified statement that the movant has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer with the party not making the disclosure in an effort to secure the disclosure without court action. The party who has requested the admission may move to determine the sufficiency of the answer or objection. Unless the court determines that an objection is justified, it shall order that an answer be served. If the court determines that an answer does not comply with the requirements of the rule, it may order either that the matter is admitted, or that an amended answer be served. The court may, in lieu of one of these orders, determine that final disposition of the request be made at a pretrial conference or at a designated time before trial. The provisions of MCR 2.313(A)(5) apply to the award of expenses incurred in relation to the motion.
(D)-(F) [Unchanged.]
Staff Comment: The proposed amendments of Rules 2.309, 2.310, and 2.312 would require that discovery motions include a certified statement that the movant has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer with the party not making the disclosure in an effort to secure compliance without court action. The proposed amendment of Rule 2.310 also includes a requirement that the responding party bear the cost of production, and that the requesting party bear the expense of inspection, copying, etc.
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 the present form. Timely comments will be considered and are 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 in writing or electronically by January 1, 2002. P.O. Box 30052, Lansing, MI 48909, or MSC_clerk@jud.state.mi.us. When filing a comment, please refer to file99-65.
Page 1207