October 1, 2001



99-65
Proposed Amendments of
Rules 2.309, 2.310, and 
2.312 of the
Michigan Court Rules
                             

          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 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 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.

          (4)-(5)   [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.

               (D)  [Unchanged.]

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 file 99-65.