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

Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.8379 (2026)

Fines and costs assessed in district court; payment; disposition; definitions.

✓ 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


600.8379 Fines and costs assessed in district court; payment; disposition; definitions.

Sec. 8379.

    (1) Fines and costs assessed in the district court must be paid to the clerk of the court who shall appropriate them as follows:

    (a) Except as provided in subsections (3) and (4), a fine imposed for the violation of a penal law of this state and a civil fine ordered in a civil infraction action for violation of a law of this state must be paid to the county treasurer and applied for library purposes as provided by law.

    (b) In districts of the first and second class, costs imposed for the violation of a penal law of this state or ordered in a civil infraction action for the violation of a law of this state must be paid to the treasurer of the county in which the action was commenced. In districts of the third class, costs imposed for the violation of a penal law of this state or ordered in a civil infraction action for the violation of a law of this state must be paid to the treasurer of the political subdivision where the guilty plea or civil infraction admission was entered or where the trial or civil infraction action hearing took place.

    (c) Except as provided for fines and costs in subsection (2) and for fines under subsections (3) and (4), in districts of the first and second class, 1/3 of all fines and costs, other than those imposed for the violation of a penal law of this state or ordered in a civil infraction action for the violation of a law of this state, must be paid to the political subdivision whose law was violated and 2/3 must be paid to the county in which the political subdivision is located. Except as provided for fines under subsections (3) and (4), in districts of the third class, all fines and costs, other than those imposed for the violation of a penal law of this state or ordered in a civil infraction action for the violation of a law of this state, must be paid to the political subdivision whose law was violated, except that where fines and costs are assessed in a political subdivision other than the political subdivision whose law was violated, 2/3 must be paid to the political subdivision where the guilty plea or civil infraction admission was entered or where the trial or civil infraction action hearing took place and the balance must be paid to the political subdivision whose law was violated.

    (d) In a district of the third class, if each political subdivision within the district, by resolution of its governing body, agrees to a distribution of fines and costs, other than fines imposed for the violation of a penal law of this state or ordered in a civil infraction action for the violation of a law of this state or for a violation as provided in subsection (3) or (4), differently than as provided by this section, the distribution of those fines and costs among the political subdivisions of that district must be as agreed to. An existing agreement applicable to the distribution of fines and costs must apply with the same effect to the distribution of civil fines and costs ordered in civil infraction actions.

    (e) Except as provided in subsections (3) and (4), a civil fine imposed on a person for violation of a provision of a code or an ordinance of a political subdivision of this state regulating the operation of a commercial vehicle that substantially corresponds to a provision of the Michigan vehicle code, 1949 PA 300, MCL 257.1 to 257.923, must be paid to the county treasurer and allocated as follows:

    (i) Seventy percent to the political subdivision in which the citation is issued.

    (ii) Thirty percent for library purposes as provided by law.

    (f) Except as provided in subsections (3) and (4), a civil fine imposed on a person for violation of a provision of a code or an ordinance regulating the operation of a commercial vehicle adopted by a city, township, or village under section 1 of 1956 PA 62, MCL 257.951, must be paid to the county treasurer and allocated as follows:

    (i) Seventy percent to the political subdivision in which the citation is issued.

    (ii) Thirty percent for library purposes as provided by law.

    (2) Except as provided in subsections (3) and (4), in the fifty-second district, 30% of all fines and costs, other than those imposed for the violation of a penal law of this state or ordered in a civil infraction action for the violation of a law of this state, must be paid to the political subdivision whose law was violated and 70% must be paid to the county in which the political subdivision is located. This subsection applies only if the consolidation of the forty-fifth-b district with the fifty-second district, as provided in section 8123, takes place pursuant to section 8177.

    (3) A civil fine ordered in a civil infraction action for a violation of section 682 of the Michigan vehicle code, 1949 PA 300, MCL 257.682, or an ordinance of a political subdivision that substantially corresponds to section 682 of the Michigan vehicle code, 1949 PA 300, MCL 257.682, that is a camera-based violation as defined in section 682 must be paid to the county treasurer or the county treasurer's designee and distributed as provided in section 909 of the Michigan vehicle code, 1949 PA 300, MCL 257.909.

    (4) A civil fine ordered in a civil infraction action for a violation of section 627c of the Michigan vehicle code, 1949 PA 300, MCL 257.627c, must be paid to the state transportation department and distributed as provided in section 909 of the Michigan vehicle code, 1949 PA 300, MCL 257.909.

    (5) As used in subsection (1)(e) and (f):

    (a) "Commercial vehicle" includes a motor vehicle used for the transportation of passengers for hire or constructed or used for transportation of goods, wares, or merchandise and a motor vehicle designed and used for drawing other vehicles and not so constructed as to carry any load on the vehicle independently or any part of the weight of a vehicle or load so drawn.

    (b) "Operation" means being in actual physical control of a vehicle regardless of whether the person is licensed under the Michigan vehicle code, 1949 PA 300, MCL 257.1 to 257.923, as an operator or chauffeur.

    (c) "Person" means every natural person, partnership, association, or corporation and their legal successors.

    

    

History: Add. 1968, Act 154, Imd. Eff. June 17, 1968 ;-- Am. 1969, Act 239, Eff. Sept. 1, 1969 ;-- Am. 1978, Act 511, Eff. Aug. 1, 1979 ;-- Am. 1979, Act 67, Eff. Aug. 1, 1979 ;-- Am. 1990, Act 54, Imd. Eff. Apr. 11, 1990 ;-- Am. 2000, Act 93, Imd. Eff. May 15, 2000 ;-- Am. 2024, Act 162, Eff. Apr. 2, 2025 ;-- Am. 2024, Act 165, Eff. Apr. 2, 2025

Compiler's Notes:

    Section 2 of Act 54 of 1990 provides:

    “If a new judicial circuit of the circuit court is created under this amendatory act pursuant to section 550a, the change in the composition of the affected judicial circuits shall take effect for judicial purposes on January 1, 1991. If the fifty-sixth judicial circuit is created pursuant to this amendatory act, the incumbent judge of the fifth judicial circuit who resides in Eaton county shall become the judge of the fifty-sixth judicial circuit on January 1, 1991, and shall serve until the term for which he or she was elected in the fifth judicial circuit expires.”

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases, 1974–2016 · leading case: City of Huntington Woods v. City of Oak Park, 874 N.W.2d 214 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Huntington Woods v. City of Oak Park, 874 N.W.2d 214 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 19× “PROCEDURAL HISTORY Plaintiffs alleged in their complaint that from 1996 to 2011 defendants Oak Park and the 45th District Court violated their statutory duty under MCL 600.8379 to disburse one-third of the costs and fees assessed for the building fund and the retirees’…”
Huron Twp. v. City Disposal Sys., Inc., 531 N.W.2d 153 (Mich. 1995). · cites it 4× “236 of the Public Acts of 1961, being section 600.8379 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.”
In re James, 821 N.W.2d 144 (Mich. 2012). · cites it 2× “4803; MCL 600.8379; MCL 750.174; *559 MCL 750.175; MCL 750.”
Huron Twp. v. City Disposal Sys., Inc., 505 N.W.2d 897 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “236 of the Public Acts of 1961, being section 600.8379 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.”
Wayne Cnty. v. Plymouth Charter Twp., 612 N.W.2d 440 (Mich. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “MCL 600.8379(l)(c); MSA 27A.8379(l)(c). In first- and second-class judicial districts, the county is responsible for the maintenance of the district court and two-thirds of all fines and costs resulting from the prosecution of ordinance violations must be paid to the county.”
City of Grand Rapids v. Kent Cnty., 292 N.W.2d 475 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). “An existing agreement applicable to the distribution of fines and costs shall apply with the same effect to the distribution of civil fines and costs ordered in civil infraction actions.”
in Re Hon Sylvia a James (Mich. 2012). · cites it 2× “The JTC issued its decision and recommendations for discipline on June 11, 2012. It adopted all but one5 of the master’s findings, concluding that “[r]espondent’s prolonged and repeated pattern of misconduct in purposefully violating statutes, misappropriating public funds, and…”
City of Huntington Woods v. City of Oak Park (Mich. 2016). “in only one political subdivision, all district funding units within the district have an independent obligation to fund the court; (2) whether the parties in this case agreed that the 45th District Court would be funded entirely by the City of Oak Park; and (3) whether revenue…”
City of Huntington Woods v. City of Oak Park (Mich. 2016). “The parties shall include among the issues to be briefed: (1) whether the revenue-sharing scheme provided in MCL 600.8379(1)(c) relates to a political subdivision’s obligation to fund a district court; (2) whether the appropriation obligation in MCL 600.”
City of Huntington Woods v. City of Oak Park (Mich. 2016). “The parties shall include among the issues to be briefed: (1) whether the revenue-sharing scheme provided in MCL 600.8379(1)(c) relates to a political subdivision’s obligation to fund a district court; (2) whether the appropriation obligation in MCL 600.”
Faintuck v. Oakland Cnty. Treasurer, 219 N.W.2d 810 (Mich. Ct. App. 1974). “” MCLA 600.8379; MSA 27A.8379 provides for distribution of fines and costs.”
City of Huntington Woods v. City of Oak Park, 873 N.W.2d 779 (Mich. 2016). “in only one political subdivision, all district funding units within the district have an independent obligation to fund the court; (2) whether the parties in this case agreed that the 45th District Court would be funded entirely by the City of Oak Park; and (3) whether revenue…”
Show all 13 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.8379(1)(c) — 4 cases
City of Huntington Woods v. City of Oak Park, 874 N.W.2d 214 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015). “PROCEDURAL HISTORY Plaintiffs alleged in their complaint that from 1996 to 2011 defendants Oak Park and the 45th District Court violated their statutory duty under MCL 600.8379 to disburse one-third of the costs and fees assessed for the building fund and the retirees’…”
City of Huntington Woods v. City of Oak Park (Mich. 2016). “in only one political subdivision, all district funding units within the district have an independent obligation to fund the court; (2) whether the parties in this case agreed that the 45th District Court would be funded entirely by the City of Oak Park; and (3) whether revenue…”
City of Huntington Woods v. City of Oak Park (Mich. 2016). “The parties shall include among the issues to be briefed: (1) whether the revenue-sharing scheme provided in MCL 600.8379(1)(c) relates to a political subdivision’s obligation to fund a district court; (2) whether the appropriation obligation in MCL 600.”
City of Huntington Woods v. City of Oak Park (Mich. 2016). “The parties shall include among the issues to be briefed: (1) whether the revenue-sharing scheme provided in MCL 600.8379(1)(c) relates to a political subdivision’s obligation to fund a district court; (2) whether the appropriation obligation in MCL 600.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.8379(l)(c) — 3 cases
City of Huntington Woods v. City of Oak Park, 874 N.W.2d 214 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015). “PROCEDURAL HISTORY Plaintiffs alleged in their complaint that from 1996 to 2011 defendants Oak Park and the 45th District Court violated their statutory duty under MCL 600.8379 to disburse one-third of the costs and fees assessed for the building fund and the retirees’…”
Wayne Cnty. v. Plymouth Charter Twp., 612 N.W.2d 440 (Mich. Ct. App. 2000). “MCL 600.8379(l)(c); MSA 27A.8379(l)(c). In first- and second-class judicial districts, the county is responsible for the maintenance of the district court and two-thirds of all fines and costs resulting from the prosecution of ordinance violations must be paid to the county.”
City of Huntington Woods v. City of Oak Park, 873 N.W.2d 779 (Mich. 2016). “in only one political subdivision, all district funding units within the district have an independent obligation to fund the court; (2) whether the parties in this case agreed that the 45th District Court would be funded entirely by the City of Oak Park; and (3) whether revenue…”
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.