Michigan Senate Bill SB0261

Michigan 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/23/25
• Refer: 4/23/25
• Report Pass: 5/6/25
• Refer: 5/6/25
• Report Pass: 5/7/25
• Engrossed: 5/20/25
• Refer: 5/20/25

Caption

Civil procedure: other; civil actions for criminal sexual conduct; provide exception to notice requirements for actions filed in the court of claims. Amends sec. 6431 of 1961 PA 236 (MCL 600.6431). TIE BAR WITH: SB 257'25

Summary

SB 261 amends Michigan’s Court of Claims notice statute, MCL 600.6431, to create an exception to the usual pre-suit notice requirements for certain civil actions involving criminal sexual conduct. Under current law, most claims against the state must be filed within one year of accrual, and property-damage or personal-injury claims must be filed within six months of the event giving rise to the claim, with detailed notice requirements and service on the attorney general and affected state entities. The bill adds an exception so that those notice requirements do not apply to claims covered by the related provisions in section 5851b, which concern civil actions for criminal sexual conduct.

Impact

The bill would narrow the application of Michigan’s state-claim notice statute by exempting a specified category of criminal sexual conduct civil actions from the filing and notice deadlines that otherwise bar claims against the state. It would also apply retroactively to actions pending on the effective date and to actions brought under section 5851b(4), potentially allowing some claims to proceed that might otherwise be dismissed for failure to comply with notice timing rules. The bill is tie-barred to SB 257, meaning it would not take effect unless that companion bill is enacted.

Sentiment

The available voting history suggests the bill had majority support in the Senate, passing committee 6-0 and third reading 25-9. That pattern indicates generally favorable sentiment toward creating an exception for these claims, though the recorded floor opposition shows there was still meaningful resistance. No committee transcript is available, so the specific arguments for and against the bill are not reflected in the provided record.

Contention

The main point of contention is whether claims involving criminal sexual conduct should be exempt from the state’s standard notice and filing deadlines, which are designed to give the state prompt notice and preserve evidence. Supporters appear to favor easing procedural barriers for survivors bringing civil actions, especially given the retroactive application. Opponents likely object to weakening notice protections for the state and to the bill’s retroactive reach, which can revive or preserve claims that might otherwise be time-barred. The tie-bar to SB 257 also makes the bill dependent on related legislation, indicating the two measures are part of a broader package.