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

Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6422 (2026)

Court of claims; practice and procedure; fees.

✓ 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


600.6422 Court of claims; practice and procedure; fees.

Sec. 6422.

    (1) Practice and procedure in the court of claims shall be in accordance with the statutes and court rules prescribing the practice in the circuit courts of this state, except as otherwise provided in this section.

    (2) The supreme court may adopt special rules for the court of claims.

    (3) All fees in the court of claims shall be at the rate established by statute or court rule for actions in the circuit courts of this state and shall be paid to the clerk of the court of claims.

History: 1961, Act 236, Eff. Jan. 1, 1963 ;-- Am. 2013, Act 164, Imd. Eff. Nov. 12, 2013

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1971–2025 · leading case: Greenfield Constr. Co. v. Dep't of State Highways, 261 N.W.2d 718 (Mich. 1978).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Greenfield Constr. Co. v. Dep't of State Highways, 261 N.W.2d 718 (Mich. 1978). · cites it 4× “MCLA 600.6422; MSA 27A.6422. GCR 1963, 521 provides for declaratory judgments which Honigman and Hawkins say have "been used to good effect in Michigan in a wide range of cases involving matters such as the meaning and effect of a contract".”
Council of Organizations & Others for Educ. About Parochiaid v. State, 909 N.W.2d 449 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “4 It is true that MCL 600.6422(1) indicates that "[p]ractice and procedure in the court of claims shall be in accordance with the statutes and court rules prescribing practice in the circuit courts of this state, except as otherwise provided in this section.”
Stepp v. Dep't of Nat. Resources, 404 N.W.2d 665 (Mich. Ct. App. 1987). “The first subissue of this argument is: What are the applicable court rules? The Revised Judicature Act provides: Practice and procedure in the court of claims shall be in accordance with the statutes and court rules prescribing the practice in the circuit courts of this state,…”
Washtenaw Asphalt Co. v. State, 201 N.W.2d 277 (Mich. Ct. App. 1972). · cites it 2× “MCLA 600.6422; MSA 27A.6422. This is rather the interpretation of the legal significance of the terms of the contract as drafted by the defendant and accepted by the plaintiff.”
Cooke Contracting Co. v. Dep't of State Highways, 190 N.W.2d 683 (Mich. Ct. App. 1971). · cites it 2× “2 MCLA § 600.6422 (Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 27A.”
Martha Cavill v. State of Michigan (Mich. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 4× “See Norman v Dep’t of Transp, ___ Mich App ___, ___; ___ NW 2d ___ (2021); slip op at 7 (“MCL 600.6422 unambiguously provides that the Court of Claims must follow the statutes and the procedural court rules prescribed by our Supreme Court, but it also authorizes our Supreme…”
Progress Michigan v. Attorney Gen. (Mich. 2020). · cites it 3× “Under MCL 600.6422 and MCL 600.6434(1), practice and procedure in the Court of Claims is governed by the statutes and court rules prescribing practice in the circuit courts of Michigan.”
Cooke Contracting Co. v. Dep't of State Highways, 213 N.W.2d 262 (Mich. Ct. App. 1973). · cites it 2× “The court further finds that the provision in the standard specifications manual for administrative remedies does not toll or waive the statute above cited, and that the State Highway Department has no power or jurisdiction to waive the statute even if it expressly wished to do…”
Timothy L Johnson v. Pub. Sch. Employees Ret. Sys. (Mich. Ct. App. 2020). “The trial court then concluded that an order to return the involuntarily withheld funds was not a “money judgment” within the meaning of MCL 600.6422(2) because the order merely restored property to plaintiffs, and because the order was for equitable relief resulting from a…”
Chamar Avery v. State of Michigan (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). “MCL 600.6422 provides in relevant part: (1) Practice and procedure in the court of claims shall be in accordance with the statutes and court rules prescribing the practice in the circuit courts of this state, except as otherwise provided in this section.”
Joseph Chisholm v. State Police (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). “MCL 600.6422 provides that the practice and procedure in the Court of Claims is “governed by the statutes and court rules applicable to proceedings in the circuit court, unless otherwise specifically stated in the [Court of Claims Act].”
Miguel Ortiz v. Michael David Fox (Mich. Ct. App. 2024). ““MCL 600.6422 provides that the practice and procedure in the Court of Claims is governed by the statutes and court rules applicable to proceedings in the circuit court, unless otherwise specifically stated in the [Court of Claims Act].”
Show all 14 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6422(1) — 3 cases
Council of Organizations & Others for Educ. About Parochiaid v. State, 909 N.W.2d 449 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “4 It is true that MCL 600.6422(1) indicates that "[p]ractice and procedure in the court of claims shall be in accordance with the statutes and court rules prescribing practice in the circuit courts of this state, except as otherwise provided in this section.”
Martha Cavill v. State of Michigan (Mich. Ct. App. 2022). “See Norman v Dep’t of Transp, ___ Mich App ___, ___; ___ NW 2d ___ (2021); slip op at 7 (“MCL 600.6422 unambiguously provides that the Court of Claims must follow the statutes and the procedural court rules prescribed by our Supreme Court, but it also authorizes our Supreme…”
Progress Michigan v. Attorney Gen. (Mich. 2020). “Under MCL 600.6422 and MCL 600.6434(1), practice and procedure in the Court of Claims is governed by the statutes and court rules prescribing practice in the circuit courts of Michigan.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6422(2) — 1 case
Timothy L Johnson v. Pub. Sch. Employees Ret. Sys. (Mich. Ct. App. 2020). “The trial court then concluded that an order to return the involuntarily withheld funds was not a “money judgment” within the meaning of MCL 600.6422(2) because the order merely restored property to plaintiffs, and because the order was for equitable relief resulting from a…”
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.