Michigan Senate Bill SB0086

Michigan 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/16/23
• Refer: 2/16/23
• Report Pass: 3/14/23
• Refer: 3/14/23
• Report Pass: 3/16/23
• Engrossed: 3/21/23
• Refer: 3/21/23
• Report Pass: 4/12/23

Caption

Civil procedure: service of process; service of process for extreme risk protection order actions; provide for, and waive court fees. Amends secs. 1908, 2529 & 2559 of 1961 PA 236 (MCL 600.1908 et seq.). TIE BAR WITH: SB 0083'23

Impact

The proposed changes would standardize and clarify the procedures related to service of process within Michigan's civil justice system. The bill intends to ensure that service can be conducted by individuals of suitable age who are not involved in the action, potentially streamlining how cases are processed. Additionally, the bill outlines a comprehensive fee structure for various filings and services, which could influence access to the courts for individuals who may be deterred by costs, emphasizing considerations for indigency and waiver of fees as needed.

Summary

Senate Bill No. 86 aims to amend specific provisions of the Revised Judicature Act of 1961, focusing on the rules surrounding the service of process in civil actions and the associated court fees. The bill proposes modifications to sections that outline who may serve process, the fees required for filing civil actions, and the waiving of fees under certain conditions. One notable amendment is the specification that service of process under the extreme risk protection order act is not subjected to these rules. This distinction is significant as it reflects the urgency and sensitivity of such matters.

Contention

While the bill may bring about efficiencies in civil procedure, there are concerns about the implications of the fee structures proposed, especially regarding low-income individuals and their access to legal recourse. The ability for the court to waive or suspend fees under specific circumstances addresses this concern, but debates may arise over the practical application of such provisions. Furthermore, the exclusion of services under the extreme risk protection order act from the fee structure indicates existing legislative priorities aimed at safeguarding vulnerable populations amidst rising discussions on gun control and mental health.