WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 6073

AN ACT RELATING TO HEALTH AND SAFETY -- THE RHODE ISLAND FAMILY HOME -- VISITING ACT

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Karen Alzate and 4 co-sponsors

The bill lets prevailing parties recover reasonable costs and market-rate attorney fees in civil actions against the State, broadening who can recover and removing a strict cap.

04/24/2025 Committee recommended measure be held for further study
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 6073

Summary — HB 6073 (Revised Judicature Act amendments: recovery of costs and fees in actions involving the state)

Status and procedural history (selected)
- Introduced: Jan 22, 2025 (Rep. Matt Bierlein).
- House passed with amendment (SCH. A) on May 19, 2025; favorably reported to Senate May 20, 2025 (Senate Cal. No. 520; File No. 940).
- Bill amends sections 2421b–2421e of the Revised Judicature Act of 1961 (MCL 600.2421b et seq.).

Purpose
- To expand and clarify when a prevailing party in civil litigation involving the State may recover costs and fees, and to remove certain restrictions that previously limited awards (including a statutory cap on attorney fees and specified exclusions of parties and some state entities).

Key provisions and changes
- Definitions (Sec. 2421b)
- "Costs and fees" expressly includes: reasonable expert witness expenses, reasonable costs of necessary studies/reports/tests, and reasonable attorney fees (including for appeals).
- "Party" is defined simply as a named plaintiff or defendant in the action. Language that excluded individuals or entities above specified net-worth thresholds or large employers appears removed — broadening eligibility to recover.
- "Prevailing party" is clarified for multi-issue/multi-count cases (prevailing as to each remedy/issue) and single-issue cases (prevailing on the entire record).
- The definition of "State" refers to a state agency/department or officials acting in their official capacity; the bill removes or narrows certain prior exclusions (see impacts below).

  • Award standard and process (Sec. 2421c)
    • A court shall award costs and fees to a prevailing party (other than the State) in civil actions involving the State unless the State demonstrates its position was substantially justifiable.
    • For particular actions (e.g., certain liquor/license actions, DHHS actions concerning child-abuse central registry or child support/paternity, summary license suspensions), the court may award fees only if the State’s position was frivolous — with defined tests for frivolousness (harassment motive, no reasonable factual basis, or devoid of legal merit).
    • Procedural requirements for fee motions are specified: moving party must show prevailing-party status, amount sought with itemized statement(s), eligibility, and, when applicable, that the State’s position was frivolous. Protective orders for financial records are allowed.
    • Courts may reduce or deny awards if the prevailing party unduly protracted the action.
    • Fee measurement: awards must reflect reasonable costs actually incurred and fees based on prevailing market rates for comparable services. The prior statutory $75/hour cap for attorney fees is removed and replaced with a requirement that courts award a reasonable attorney fee following applicable Michigan Supreme Court precedent.
    • Awards are limited to the extent the State caused the prevailing party to incur those costs/fees.

Who is affected
- Prevailing plaintiffs and defendants in civil cases against state agencies, departments, officials (potentially including agencies previously excluded such as the Department of Corrections and others, depending on final text/interpretation).
- State government and its agencies — increased exposure to full-cost fee awards (expert fees, market-rate attorney fees, studies) when they lose or cannot show their position was substantially justifiable (or frivolous standard met in certain matters).
- Private litigants of all sizes: removal of prior net-worth/size exclusions means higher‑net‑worth individuals and larger organizations may be eligible to recover fees.

Potential impacts
- Fiscal: greater potential liability for state budgets if courts award market-rate attorney fees and associated costs.
- Litigation behavior: may encourage settlement and deter unnecessary litigation by the State; could encourage private parties to bring or continue meritorious claims against the State.
- Equity: broader availability of fee-shifting may improve access to justice for litigants suing state entities by helping them recoup litigation expenses.

Notes
- The bill retains limits tying awards to costs actually caused by the State and preserves a heightened standard (frivolousness) for certain administrative/license-related matters.
- Final scope (e.g., exactly which prior statutory exclusions are removed) will depend on the enacted text and judicial interpretation.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.