May 14, 1996



94-20




Amendment of Rule 2.112 
and adoption of Rule 2.615 of 
the Michigan Court Rules
_______________________________/

     On order of the Court, notice of a proposed amendment having
been provided, 448 Mich 1210 (1995), and consideration having been
given to the comments received in response to that notice, the
following amendment to Rule 2.112 of the Michigan Court Rules is
adopted and the following new Rule 2.615 of the Michigan Court
Rules is promulgated, effective July 1, 1996.

     In adopting these rules, the Court should not be understood as
foreclosing consideration of a challenge to the wisdom, validity,
or meaning of a rule when a question is brought to the Court
judicially or by a proposal for a change in the rule.  See 402 Mich
lxxxviii (1978).  


[The present language is to be repealed and replaced by the
following language unless otherwise indicated below.]


Rule 2.112     Pleading Special Matters

(A) - (F)  [Unchanged.]

(G)  Judgment.  A judgment or decision of a domestic or foreign
     court, a tribal court of a federally recognized Indian tribe,
     a judicial or quasi-judicial tribunal, or a board or officer,
     must be alleged with sufficient particularity to identify it;
     it is not necessary to state facts showing jurisdiction to
     render it.

(H) - (I)  [Unchanged.]

(J)  Law of Other Jurisdictions; Notice in Pleadings.  A party who
     intends to rely on or raise an issue concerning the law of

     (1)  a state other than Michigan,

     (2)  a United States territory,

     (3)  a foreign nation or unit thereof, or

     (4)  a federally recognized Indian tribe 

     must give notice of that intention either in his or her
     pleadings or in a written notice served by the close of
     discovery.


[The following language is adopted as a new court rule.]


Rule 2.615     Enforcement of Tribal Judgments

(A)  The judgments, decrees, orders, warrants, subpoenas, records,
     and other judicial acts of a tribal court of a federally
     recognized Indian tribe are recognized, and have the same
     effect and are subject to the same procedures, defenses, and
     proceedings as judgments, decrees, orders, warrants,
     subpoenas, records, and other judicial acts of any court of
     record in this state, subject to the provisions of this rule.

(B)  The recognition described in subrule (A) applies only if the
     tribe or tribal court 

     (1)  enacts an ordinance, court rule, or other binding measure
          that obligates the tribal court to enforce the judgments,
          decrees, orders, warrants, subpoenas, records, and
          judicial acts of the courts of this state, and

     (2)  transmits the ordinance, court rule or other measure to
          the State Court Administrative Office.  The State Court
          Administrative Office shall make available to state
          courts the material received pursuant to paragraph
          (B)(1). 

(C)  A judgment, decree, order, warrant, subpoena, record, or other
     judicial act of a tribal court of a federally recognized
     Indian tribe that has taken the actions described in subrule
     (B) is presumed to be valid.  To overcome that presumption, an
     objecting party must demonstrate that

     (1)  the tribal court lacked personal or subject-matter
          jurisdiction, or 

     (2)  the judgment, decree, order, warrant, subpoena, record,
          or other judicial act of the tribal court

          (a)  was obtained by fraud, duress, or coercion,

          (b)  was obtained without fair notice or a fair hearing,

          (c)  is repugnant to the public policy of the State of
               Michigan, or 

          (d)  is not final under the laws and procedures of the
               tribal court.  

(D)  This rule does not apply to judgments or orders that federal
     law requires be given full faith and credit.


STAFF COMMENT:  The 1996 amendment of MCR 2.112(G) and (J)
and the 1996 promulgation of MCR 2.615 were prompted by proposals
from the Indian Tribal Court/State Trial Court Forum and from the
State Bar of Michigan.  The adopted rules reflect a synthesis of
those sources, of a corresponding rule of the North Dakota Supreme
Court, and of the model rules generated by the Michigan Indian
Judicial Association.

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