Mich. Admin. Ord. Administrative Order No. 2016-3
On order of the Court, effective immediately, the Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals are authorized to implement a Prisoner Electronic Filing Program with the Michigan Department of Corrections.
Participants in the Prisoner Electronic Filing Program consist of the Clerks' Offices of the Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, the correctional facilities operated by the Michigan Department of Corrections ("MDOC"), and the prisoner litigants housed in the correctional facilities who are or who seek to be parties to litigation filed in the Supreme Court or Court of Appeals.
The digital equipment used to transmit the documents to the Courts are to be programmed with the email addresses of the Clerks' Offices for receiving electronic filings from the MDOC. The MDOC will provide the Clerks' Offices with email addresses for receiving electronic notices from the Court on behalf of the prisoner litigants at the correctional facilities.
Prisoner litigants may, but are not required to, utilize the forms created by the Clerks' Offices of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals for self-represented litigants and made available to the MDOC. The Courts will accept all case-related documents in criminal or civil matters.
Filings by prisoner litigants should be submitted electronically to the appropriate Clerk's Office to avoid delayed or lost filings by the U.S. Postal Service.
If the e-filing system is not operational at the time of the filing's presentment to prison staff for transmission, the filing must be submitted by mail, unless the system is expected to resume operation before the filing deadline. A prisoner litigant who is transferred from a correctional facility with e-filing capability to a correctional facility without e-filing capability must submit all future filings by mail via the postal service. A prisoner litigant who is transferred into a correctional facility with e-filing capability should electronically transmit all subsequent filings to the appropriate Court. The prisoner litigant must immediately notify the appropriate Clerk's Office of any change of address.
MDOC staff will scan the prisoner litigant's filings at the correctional facility and transmit them, to the appropriate Clerk's Office email address. An automated email reply will be sent to the MDOC email address acknowledging receipt of the filing. The original documents will be returned to the prisoner litigant, who must retain them in their original form and produce them at a later time if directed by either Court.
The Clerks' Offices will review filings as soon as practicable for jurisdiction and compliance with the court rules. If the Courts do not have jurisdiction or if the filing does not substantially comply with the court rules, the Clerks' Offices will transmit a Notice of Rejection to the MDOC that specifies the reason(s) for the rejection.
If the filing is accepted, it will be docketed in the Court's case management system and electronically served on those persons or entities that the prisoner litigant has identified as parties to the litigation if they are registered users of MiFILE or have an email address listed in the State Bar of Michigan attorney directory. The Clerks' Offices will mail copies of the prisoner litigant's filing via the U.S. Postal Service to identified parties who cannot be e-served. For accepted filings, the Clerks' Offices will transmit a Notice of Acceptance to the MDOC that identifies, among other things, the names and service information of parties who were served with the filing. The Notice of Acceptance also will be electronically transmitted or mailed to the lower courts/tribunals as notice of the appeal under MCR 7.204(E), MCR 7.205(B), or MCR 7.305(A)(3), as applicable. The MDOC will provide a copy of the Notice of Rejection or Notice of Acceptance to the prisoner litigant as soon as practicable.
Mich. Admin. Ord. Administrative Order No. 2016-3
Staff Comment (ADM File No. 2024-25): The amendment of AO 2016-3 expands the Prisoner Electronic Filing Program.
The staff comment is not an authoritative construction by the Court. In addition, adoption of a new rule or amendment in no way reflects a substantive determination by this Court.