WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 1192

Relating to hydroelectric water rights.

2025 Regular Session Introduced by James Manning

SB 1192 creates an exception to pre-suit notice for criminal sexual conduct claims in the Michigan Court of Claims, letting survivors sue the State without strict notice deadlines.

In committee upon adjournment.
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 1192

Summary — SB 1192 (Civil procedure: court of claims notice exception for criminal sexual conduct claims)

Status: Introduced February 10, 2025; referred to Committee on Government Operations (read first time Feb 28, 2025).
Primary subject: Civil procedure; claims against the state (Court of Claims).
Primary sponsor: (per file) Sen. Analise Ortiz (and listed cosponsors).

Main purpose / intent

SB 1192 would amend section 6431 of the Revised Judicature Act (MCL 600.6431) to create an exception to existing pre‑suit notice requirements for certain civil actions filed in the Michigan Court of Claims that arise from criminal sexual conduct. The bill is intended to allow survivors of criminal sexual conduct to bring claims against the State (or its agencies/institutions) in the Court of Claims without being barred by the statutory notice deadlines that otherwise apply to claims against the State.

Existing law (baseline)

Under current MCL 600.6431:
- A claim against the State generally cannot be maintained unless the claimant files, within 1 year after the claim accrues, either a written claim or a written notice of intent to file with the Clerk of the Court of Claims.
- For claims for property damage or personal injury, the filing deadline is 6 months after the event giving rise to the claim.
- The claim or notice must include time/place, detailed nature and damages, designation of the state department/agency involved, and a verified signature.
- Copies must be provided to the Attorney General and designated agencies.

What SB 1192 would change

  • The bill proposes to amend MCL 600.6431 to provide an exception to those pre‑suit notice requirements for actions alleging criminal sexual conduct that are filed in the Court of Claims. (The precise amendment language is not included in the version provided to this summary; the bill title and related materials indicate the narrow focus on criminal sexual conduct claims.)
  • The bill’s enacting provisions in the available materials state that the amendment would apply retroactively to actions pending on the effective date and to certain actions brought under MCL 600.5851b(4).
  • The bill’s effective date appears to be contingent on enactment of a companion or related bill (documents reference House Bill No. 4482 or Senate Bill No. 1187 in different versions).

Who would be affected

  • Claimants (survivors) seeking to sue the State of Michigan or its departments, commissions, boards, institutions, arms, or agencies in the Court of Claims for harms arising from criminal sexual conduct.
  • State defendants and the Attorney General’s office, which defends state agencies in Court of Claims litigation — potential increase in claims and litigation exposure where pre‑suit notice had previously been a bar.
  • Court of Claims case processing and state agency risk management (procedural and fiscal impacts).

Procedural/timeline notes

  • The bill was introduced Feb 10, 2025 and recorded as read and referred to committee (Committee on Government Operations per status line).
  • The bill includes retroactivity language for pending cases but appears to be contingent on enactment of a separate enabling bill (text references vary among versions).
  • Exact implementation mechanics and any limits (e.g., definition of "criminal sexual conduct," whether the exception applies only to court of claims vs. all civil forums, or any temporal or factual limitations) are not shown in the excerpt provided; those specifics will be determinative of scope and should be reviewed in the finalized amendment language.

Potential impacts (high level)

  • Lowers procedural hurdles for survivors to bring suits against the State arising from criminal sexual conduct by removing or modifying strict pre‑suit notice deadlines.
  • May result in an increase in claims filed in the Court of Claims and corresponding defense costs and potential liabilities for state entities.
  • May raise administrative questions about evidence preservation, record requests, and coordination between criminal prosecutions and civil claims against the State.

Note: This summary is based on the bill title, sponsor information, and the provided excerpts of MCL 600.6431 and related enacting language. The full amendment text (precise statutory changes) was not included in the materials provided; consult the bill’s printed language in the legislative docket for exact statutory wording and definitions.

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

Sign in to ask a question.