ICLE Homepage | Other New and Amended MCRs
February 28, 1997
96-51
Amendment of Michigan Court
Rule 2.403 and Repeal of Rule 4.003
___________________________________
On order of the Court, notice of proposed amendments to
Michigan Court Rule 2.403 and repeal of Rule 4.003 having been
provided, and consideration having been given to the comments
received in response to that notice, the following amendments to
MCR 2.403 are adopted and MCR 4.003 is repealed, effective
March 7, 1997.
ICLE Editor's Note:
[Italicized, bracketed text] indicates text that has been
deleted.
Bold text indicates new text.
The rules are amended as follows:
Rule 2.403 Mediation
(A) - (J) [Unchanged.]
(K) Decision.
(1) - (3) [Unchanged.]
[(4) In an action pending in the circuit court, if the
evaluation does not exceed the jurisdictional
limitation of the district court, the panel shall
include with the copy of the evaluation provided
to the mediation clerk a statement as to whether
the damages sustained, without regard to questions
of liability, exceed the jurisdictional limitation
of the district court.]
(4) - (5) [Formerly (5) - (6), redesignated, but
otherwise unchanged.]
(L) - (M) [Unchanged.]
(N) Proceedings After Rejection.
(1) - (2) [Unchanged.]
[(3) If the mediation evaluation of an action pending
in the circuit court does not exceed the
jurisdictional limitation of the district court,
the mediation clerk shall inform the trial judge
of that fact and of the statement of the mediation
panel under subrule (K)(4).]
(O) [Unchanged.]
Rule 4.003 Removal of Actions from Circuit Court to District
Court
[Repealed.]
STAFF COMMENT: MCL 600.641; MSA 27A.641 provided for
removal of certain cases from circuit court to district court.
That statute was repealed, effective January 1, 1997, by 1996 PA
374. The February 28, 1997, amendments, which are effective
March 7, 1997, repeal MCR 4.003, which implemented that
statute, and delete portions of the mediation rule, MCR 2.403,
that related to the removal procedure.
The staff comment is published only for the benefit of the bench
and bar and is not an authoritative construction by the Court.