TAXABLE COURT COSTS - H.B. 4726: COMMITTEE SUMMARY
House Bill 4726 (as passed by the House)
Sponsor: Representative Ruth Ann Jamnick
House Committee: Civil Law and the Judiciary
Senate Committee: Judiciary
CONTENT
The bill would amend the Revised Judicature Act to increase certain taxable costs that the court may allow under Chapter 57 ("Summary Proceedings to Recover Possession of Premises"). The bill includes an effective date of January 1, 2002.
The Act specifies that, in proceedings under Chapter 57, costs may be allowed in the same amounts as are provided by law in other civil actions in the same court, except for certain costs specifically provided for under the Act in the Supreme Court and the circuit court (MCL 600.2441). The court also may allow as taxable costs under Chapter 57 certain maximum amounts for certain proceedings. (Taxable costs are amounts that a court may require a nonprevailing party to pay to a prevailing party for expenses of the litigation.) The bill would increase those allowed taxable costs as shown in Table 1.
Table 1
| Proceeding | Current
Maximum |
Proposed
Maximum |
| Motion resulting in dismissal or judgment | $20 | $75 |
| Judgment taken by default* | $15 | $75 |
| Trial of a claim for possession only | $20 | $150 |
| Trial of a claim for damages only | $20 | $150 |
| Trial including both a claim for possession and a claim for money judgment | $30 | $150 |
| *The bill would add "or consent". |
The bill would retain a requirement that, in determining taxable costs in tenancy cases, the judge consider whether the jury or judge found that a portion of the rent allegedly due to the plaintiff was excused by reason of the plaintiff's breach of the lease or breach of statutory covenants.
MCL 600.5759 - Legislative Analyst: Patrick Affholter
FISCAL IMPACT
The bill would have an indeterminate impact on the State and local units of government. Revenue received or costs incurred would depend on the number of cases in which the State or a local unit of government was involved in summary proceedings and whether the State or local unit was the prevailing party.
- Fiscal Analyst: Bill BowermanS0102\s4726sa
This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan Senate staff for use by the Senate in its deliberations and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.