PROBATE CODE OF 1939
Act 288 of 1939
712A.31 Determining amount of restitution; factors in disposition report; disclosure of matters described in subsection (1); burden of demonstrating amount or type of restitution.
Sec. 31.
(1) In determining the amount of restitution to order under section 30 of this chapter, the court shall consider the amount of the loss sustained by any victim as a result of the juvenile offense. In determining whether to order the juvenile's supervisory parent to pay restitution under section 30(15) of this chapter, the court shall consider the financial resources of the juvenile's supervisory parent and the other factors specified in section 30(16) of this chapter.
(2) The court may order the person preparing a report for the purpose of disposition to obtain information pertaining to the factors set forth in subsection (1). That person shall include the information collected in the disposition report or in a separate report, as the court directs.
(3) The court shall disclose to the juvenile, the juvenile's supervisory parent, and the prosecuting attorney all portions of the disposition or other report pertaining to the matters described in subsection (1).
(4) Any dispute as to the proper amount or type of restitution shall be resolved by the court by a preponderance of the evidence. The burden of demonstrating the amount of the loss sustained by a victim as a result of the juvenile offense shall be on the prosecuting attorney. The burden of demonstrating the financial resources of the juvenile's supervisory parent and the other factors specified in section 30(16) of this chapter shall be on the supervisory parent.
History: Add. 1993, Act 344, Eff. May 1, 1994 ;-- Am. 1996, Act 561, Eff. June 1, 1997
PopularName Notes:
Probate Code
PopularName Notes:
Juvenile Code
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
4
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 2005–2025 · leading case:
In Re McEvoy, 704 N.W.2d 78 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005).
In Re McEvoy, 704 N.W.2d 78 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 4× “30 and MCL 712A.31, a court may require parents, on the basis of their status as supervisory parents, to pay restitution *58 to an insurance company for compensation paid to an insured school district under a property insurance policy.”
in Re Robert Edward White II (Mich. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 6× “30 and MCL 712A.31, utilizes the same statutory scheme for restitution that was delineated in the Crime Victim’s Rights Act (CVRA), MCL 780.”
20231207_C364128_28_364128.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 3× “] MCL 712A.31 states in relevant part: (1) In determining the amount of restitution to order under section 30 of this chapter, the court shall consider the amount of the loss sustained by any victim as a result of the juvenile offense….”
In Re Rm Minor (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 2× “” But MCL 712A.31(1) explains that, “[i]n determining the amount of restitution to order under [MCL 712A.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 712A.31(1) — 3 cases
In Re McEvoy, 704 N.W.2d 78 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005).
“30 and MCL 712A.31, a court may require parents, on the basis of their status as supervisory parents, to pay restitution *58 to an insurance company for compensation paid to an insured school district under a property insurance policy.”
in Re Robert Edward White II (Mich. Ct. App. 2019).
“30 and MCL 712A.31, utilizes the same statutory scheme for restitution that was delineated in the Crime Victim’s Rights Act (CVRA), MCL 780.”
In Re Rm Minor (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
“” But MCL 712A.31(1) explains that, “[i]n determining the amount of restitution to order under [MCL 712A.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 712A.31(4) — 2 cases
20231207_C364128_28_364128.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
“] MCL 712A.31 states in relevant part: (1) In determining the amount of restitution to order under section 30 of this chapter, the court shall consider the amount of the loss sustained by any victim as a result of the juvenile offense….”
In Re Rm Minor (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
“” But MCL 712A.31(1) explains that, “[i]n determining the amount of restitution to order under [MCL 712A.”
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.