WeVote
Log In

Bill

JA

Bill

HB 6047

Civil procedure: statute of limitations; civil actions for criminal sexual conduct; extend period of limitations, and add grace period for past occurrences. Amends sec. 5851b of 1961 PA 236 (MCL 500.5851b).

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Joey Andrews and 20 co-sponsors

HB 6047 would extend and add a grace period to Michigan’s civil statute of limitations for claims arising from criminal sexual conduct, enabling more survivors to file.

bill electronically reproduced 06/04/2026
#civilprocedure:statuteoflimitations #crimes:assaultive #crimes:crimesagainstminors #crimes:criminalsexualconduct
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 6047

Summary of HB 6047 (Michigan, 2025-2026)

Purpose and intent

HB 6047 proposes to modify Michigan’s civil procedure related to statute of limitations for civil actions arising from criminal sexual conduct. Specifically, it aims to extend the period within which such civil actions can be filed and to add a grace period for past occurrences. The underlying goal is to provide a broader window for survivors of criminal sexual conduct to pursue civil remedies against responsible parties.

Key provisions and changes

  • Extend the limitations period: The bill would lengthen (or otherwise modify) the time frame in which a plaintiff can file a civil action for claims related to criminal sexual conduct. This likely involves extending the current statute of limitations found in section 5851b of 1961 PA 236 (MCL 500.5851b).
  • Grace period for past occurrences: The bill adds a grace period to accommodate survivors whose claims would have expired under existing law, allowing them to file civil actions notwithstanding the current limits.
  • Scope of claims: Applies to civil actions arising from criminal sexual conduct, potentially affecting actions against individuals, institutions, or entities deemed legally responsible under Michigan law for such conduct.
  • Procedural alignment: Maintains existing civil procedure frameworks while adjusting the admissible filing window for these specific claims.

Who/what is affected

  • Plaintiffs (survivors of criminal sexual conduct): They would have an expanded window to bring civil lawsuits, including those whose claims would have otherwise expired.
  • Defendants: Individuals, organizations, or institutions potentially named in civil actions related to criminal sexual conduct could face lawsuits for longer periods.
  • Judicial system: Courts would handle potentially more filings related to civil claims arising from past criminal sexual conduct, with attention to any new procedural rules or grace-period implementation details.
  • Statutes and case law: The change would modify how subsection 5851b interacts with civil actions, potentially influencing precedent on related limitations issues.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Introduced and committee process:
    • Introduced and read a first time on June 4, 2026.
    • Referred to the Committee on Judiciary (as of the latest action history).
    • Reproduced electronically on June 4–9, 2026 (official bill version date).
  • Effective date and transition: The summary does not specify an effective date; typical legislative practice would set a future effective date and provide a transition rule for pending or existing cases. The bill may also specify whether the grace period applies retroactively to claims that would have expired prior to enactment or only to future filing windows.
  • Definitions and clarifications: The bill would define or clarify terms related to “criminal sexual conduct” and the specific limitations period to ensure consistent application.

Practical considerations

  • The policy aim is to enhance access to civil remedies for survivors, recognizing potential delays in reporting or pursuing civil actions following traumatic experiences.
  • Implementation will require courts to apply the new limitations framework to existing and future cases, including any tolling or grace-period mechanics.
  • Potential fiscal and caseload impacts on the judiciary and related agencies, depending on how much the filing window is extended and the number of retroactive filings permitted.

If you’d like, I can tailor this summary to include a comparison with the current statute (MCL 500.5851b) and outline potential arguments for and against the bill, once you provide any additional text or official fiscal notes.

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

Sign in to ask a question.