Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 600 / Act 236 of 1961
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6306 (2026)

Entering order of judgment; order; judgment amounts; "gross present cash value" defined; reduced judgment amount.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

REVISED JUDICATURE ACT OF 1961


Act 236 of 1961


600.6306 Entering order of judgment; order; judgment amounts; "gross present cash value" defined; reduced judgment amount.

Sec. 6306.

    (1) After a verdict is rendered by a trier of fact in favor of a plaintiff in a personal injury action other than an action for medical malpractice, an order of judgment shall be entered by the court. Subject to section 2959, the order of judgment shall be entered against each defendant, including a third-party defendant, in the following order and in the following judgment amounts:

    (a) All past economic damages, less collateral source payments as provided for in section 6303.

    (b) All past noneconomic damages.

    (c) All future economic damages, less medical and other health care costs and less collateral source payments determined to be collectible under section 6303(5), reduced to gross present cash value.

    (d) All future medical and other health care costs reduced to gross present cash value.

    (e) All future noneconomic damages reduced to gross present cash value.

    (f) All taxable and allowable costs, including interest as permitted by section 6013 or 6455 on the judgment amounts.

    (2) As used in this section, "gross present cash value" means the total amount of future damages reduced to present value at a rate of 5% per year, compounded annually, for each year in which those damages will accrue, as found by the trier of fact under section 6305(1)(b).

    (3) If the plaintiff was assigned a percentage of fault under section 6304, the total judgment amount shall be reduced, subject to section 2959, by an amount equal to the percentage of plaintiff's fault. When reducing the judgment amount as provided in this subsection, the court shall determine the ratio of total past damages to total future damages and shall allocate the amounts to be deducted proportionally between the past and future damages.

History: Add. 1986, Act 178, Eff. Oct. 1, 1986 ;-- Am. 1995, Act 161, Eff. Mar. 28, 1996 ;-- Am. 2012, Act 608, Eff. Mar. 28, 2013

Compiler's Notes:

    Section 3 of Act 178 of 1986 provides:

    “(1) Sections 2925b, 5805, 5838, and 5851 of Act No. 236 of the Public Acts of 1961, as amended by this amendatory act, shall not apply to causes of action arising before October 1, 1986.

    “(2) Sections 1483, 5838a, and 6304 of Act No. 236 of the Public Acts of 1961, as added by this amendatory act, shall apply to causes of action arising on or after October 1, 1986.

    “(3) Sections 1629, 1653, 2169, 2591, 2912c, 2912d, 2912e, 6098, 6301, 6303, 6305, 6306, 6307, 6309, and 6311 of Act No. 236 of the Public Acts of 1961, as added by this amendatory act, shall apply to cases filed on or after October 1, 1986.

    “(4) Sections 1651 and 6013 of Act No. 236 of the Public Acts of 1961, as amended by this amendatory act, shall not apply to cases filed before October 1, 1986.

    “(5) Chapter 49 of Act No. 236 of the Public Acts of 1961, as added by this amendatory act, shall apply to cases filed on or after January 1, 1987.

    “(6) Chapter 49a of Act No. 236 of the Public Acts of 1961, as added by this amendatory act, shall apply to cases filed in judicial circuits which are comprised of more than 1 county on or after July 1, 1990 and shall apply to cases filed in judicial circuits which are comprised of 1 county on or after October 1, 1988.”

    Enacting section 1 of Act 608 of 2012 provides:

    "Enacting section 1. Sections 1483, 2959, 6306, and 6307 of the revised judicature act of 1961, 1961 PA 236, MCL 600.1483, 600.2959, 600.6306, and 600.6307, as amended by this amendatory act and section 6306a of the revised judicature act of 1961, 1961 PA 236, MCL 600.6306a, as added by this amendatory act apply only to actions in which the cause of action arose on or after the effective date of this amendatory act."

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 57 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1986–2026 · leading case: Johnnie F Shinholster v. Annapolis Hosp, 471 Mich. 540 (Mich. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Johnnie F Shinholster v. Annapolis Hosp, 471 Mich. 540 (Mich. 2004). · cites it 14× “However, we note that MCL 600.6306 also uses the term “plaintiff” in referring to comparative negligence.”
Nation v. W D E Elec. Co., 563 N.W.2d 233 (Mich. 1997). · cites it 8× “§ 600.6306; M.S.A. § 27A.6306 is to be calculated using compound or simple interest.”
Velez v. Tuma, 821 N.W.2d 432 (Mich. 2012). · cites it 5× “39 MCL 600.6306 directs a trial court to make certain deductions from a jury’s award of damages before entering a final judgment, but it does not provide guidance with respect to application of the cap or the common-law setoff rule.”
Amlotte Ex Rel. Amlotte v. United States, 292 F. Supp. 2d 922 (E.D. Mich. 2003). · cites it 14× “Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6306 (1). The plaintiffs point out that the statutory blueprint directs that economic damages must be offset by the collateral source benefits referenced by Section 6303, but it has no provision for offsetting future medical and health care costs; it…”
Smith v. Khouri, 751 N.W.2d 472 (Mich. 2008). · cites it 2× “Pursuant to MCL 600.6306, those future noneconomic damages were reduced to their present value.”
Hashem v. Les Stanford Oldsmobile, Inc, 697 N.W.2d 558 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 5× “Moreover, to the extent that Les Stanford Oldsmobile implies that MCL 600.6306 precludes the jury itself from awarding damages at present value, we note that the statute governs *93 only the procedure for entering an order of judgment following a jury verdict.”
Phillips v. Mirac, Inc, 685 N.W.2d 174 (Mich. 2004). · cites it 2× “1406; statutes that provide for adding costs, fees, interest or penalties to awards include MCL 35.”
Freysinger v. Taylor Supply Co., 494 N.W.2d 870 (Mich. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 7× “MCL 600.6306; MSA 27A.6306 provides, in pertinent part: (1) After a verdict rendered by a trier of fact in favor of a plaintiff, an order of judgment shall be entered by the court.”
Campbell v. Dep't of Human Servs., 780 N.W.2d 586 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “Defendant further argues that a portion of the jury's award is for future damages and therefore must be reduced to its present-day value in accordance with *596 MCL 600.6306. Although it is possible, considering the record, including plaintiff's trial testimony, that a portion…”
Haberkorn v. Chrysler Corp., 533 N.W.2d 373 (Mich. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 3× “These collateral payments are then applied to reduce the verdict’s economic damage component under the rules set forth in MCL 600.6306; MSA 27A.6306. Plaintiff’s social security benefits fall within the type of payments that should be used to reduce the verdict within the…”
Lowe v. Est. Motors Ltd., 410 N.W.2d 706 (Mich. 1987). · cites it 2× “[16] MCL 600.6306; MSA 27A.6306, added by 1986 PA 178 .”
Heinz v. Chicago Road Inv. Co., 549 N.W.2d 47 (Mich. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “§ 600.6306; M.S.A. § 27A.6306. [1] Except, of course, in those instances where we determine that the Legislature has acted in violation of the state or federal constitution.”
Show all 57 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6306(1) — 6 cases
Dawe v. Dr Reuven Bar-Levav & Assocs., PC, 808 N.W.2d 240 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010).
Hashem v. Les Stanford Oldsmobile, Inc, 697 N.W.2d 558 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005). “Moreover, to the extent that Les Stanford Oldsmobile implies that MCL 600.6306 precludes the jury itself from awarding damages at present value, we note that the statute governs *93 only the procedure for entering an order of judgment following a jury verdict.”
Dawe v. Dr Reuvan Bar-Levav & Assocs., Pc, 761 N.W.2d 318 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008).
Freysinger v. Taylor Supply Co., 494 N.W.2d 870 (Mich. Ct. App. 1992). “MCL 600.6306; MSA 27A.6306 provides, in pertinent part: (1) After a verdict rendered by a trier of fact in favor of a plaintiff, an order of judgment shall be entered by the court.”
State Auto. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Fieger, 730 N.W.2d 212 (Mich. 2007).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6306(1)(a) — 2 cases
State Auto. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Fieger, 730 N.W.2d 212 (Mich. 2007).
Rollinger v. FCA us LLC (E.D. Mich. 2022).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6306(1)(c) — 6 cases
Velez v. Tuma, 821 N.W.2d 432 (Mich. 2012). “39 MCL 600.6306 directs a trial court to make certain deductions from a jury’s award of damages before entering a final judgment, but it does not provide guidance with respect to application of the cap or the common-law setoff rule.”
Johnnie F Shinholster v. Annapolis Hosp, 471 Mich. 540 (Mich. 2004). “However, we note that MCL 600.6306 also uses the term “plaintiff” in referring to comparative negligence.”
Phillips v. Mirac, Inc, 685 N.W.2d 174 (Mich. 2004). “1406; statutes that provide for adding costs, fees, interest or penalties to awards include MCL 35.”
Shinholster v. Annapolis Hosp., 660 N.W.2d 361 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
Rollinger v. FCA us LLC (E.D. Mich. 2022).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6306(1)(d) — 1 case
Rollinger v. FCA us LLC (E.D. Mich. 2022).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6306(1)(e) — 5 cases
Nation v. W D E Elec. Co., 563 N.W.2d 233 (Mich. 1997). “§ 600.6306; M.S.A. § 27A.6306 is to be calculated using compound or simple interest.”
Hashem v. Les Stanford Oldsmobile, Inc, 697 N.W.2d 558 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005). “Moreover, to the extent that Les Stanford Oldsmobile implies that MCL 600.6306 precludes the jury itself from awarding damages at present value, we note that the statute governs *93 only the procedure for entering an order of judgment following a jury verdict.”
Amal Abdullah v. MacY Cleaners Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
Jesse Marcus Spica v. Kevin J Schrotenboer (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
Jesse Marcus Spica v. Kevin J Schrotenboer (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6306(2) — 9 cases
Nation v. W D E Elec. Co., 563 N.W.2d 233 (Mich. 1997). “§ 600.6306; M.S.A. § 27A.6306 is to be calculated using compound or simple interest.”
Scott v. Illinois Tool Works, Inc, 550 N.W.2d 809 (Mich. Ct. App. 1996).
Janice Kirchgessner, Pers. Rep. of the Est. of John Kirchgessner, Deceased, Cross-Appellant v. United States of Am., Cross-Appellee, 958 F.2d 158 (6th Cir. 1992).
1st of Am. Bank, Mid-Michigan, N.A. v. United States, 752 F. Supp. 764 (E.D. Mich. 1990).
Nation v. W D E Elec. Co., 540 N.W.2d 788 (Mich. Ct. App. 1995).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6306(3) — 6 cases
Johnnie F Shinholster v. Annapolis Hosp, 471 Mich. 540 (Mich. 2004). “However, we note that MCL 600.6306 also uses the term “plaintiff” in referring to comparative negligence.”
Young v. Nandi, 740 N.W.2d 508 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007).
Greer v. Advantage Health, 852 N.W.2d 198 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
Freysinger v. Taylor Supply Co., 494 N.W.2d 870 (Mich. Ct. App. 1992). “MCL 600.6306; MSA 27A.6306 provides, in pertinent part: (1) After a verdict rendered by a trier of fact in favor of a plaintiff, an order of judgment shall be entered by the court.”
Shinholster v. Annapolis Hosp., 660 N.W.2d 361 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6306(l)(c) — 4 cases
Johnnie F Shinholster v. Annapolis Hosp, 471 Mich. 540 (Mich. 2004). “However, we note that MCL 600.6306 also uses the term “plaintiff” in referring to comparative negligence.”
Phillips v. Mirac, Inc, 685 N.W.2d 174 (Mich. 2004). “1406; statutes that provide for adding costs, fees, interest or penalties to awards include MCL 35.”
Lagalo v. Allied Corp., 592 N.W.2d 786 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999).
Shinholster v. Annapolis Hosp., 660 N.W.2d 361 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6306(l)(e) — 2 cases
Nation v. W D E Elec. Co., 563 N.W.2d 233 (Mich. 1997). “§ 600.6306; M.S.A. § 27A.6306 is to be calculated using compound or simple interest.”
Hashem v. Les Stanford Oldsmobile, Inc, 697 N.W.2d 558 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005). “Moreover, to the extent that Les Stanford Oldsmobile implies that MCL 600.6306 precludes the jury itself from awarding damages at present value, we note that the statute governs *93 only the procedure for entering an order of judgment following a jury verdict.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.