May 21, 2001



99-10                                        



Proposed Amendment of
Rule 103 of the
Michigan Rules of Evidence
__________________________


          On order of the Court, this is to advise that the Court
is considering the amendment of Rule 103 of the Michigan Rules of
Evidence. 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.

          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 103  Rulings on Evidence.

(a)  Effect of erroneous ruling.  Error may not be predicated
upon a ruling which admits or excludes evidence unless a
substantial right of the party is affected, and

     (1)  Objection.  In case the ruling is one admitting
evidence, a timely objection or motion to strike appears of
record, stating the specific ground of objection, if the specific
ground was not apparent from the context; or

     (2)  Offer of proof.  In case the ruling is one excluding
evidence, the substance of the evidence was made known to the
court by offer or was apparent from the context within which
questions were asked.



     Once the court makes a definitive ruling on the record
admitting or excluding evidence, either at or before trial, a
party need not renew an objection or offer of proof to preserve a
claim of error for appeal.

(b)-(d)  [Unchanged.]


Staff Comment:  This proposal is identical to an amendment
to FRE 103(a) that took effect on December 1, 2000.

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 in writing
or electronically by September 1, 2001.  P.O. Box 30052, Lansing,
MI 48909, or MSC_clerk@jud.state.mi.us.  When filing a comment,
please refer to our file No. 99-10.