Michigan Supreme Court
Lansing, Michigan 48909
____________________________________________________________________________________________
C hief Justice Justices
Maura D. Cor rigan Michael F. Cavanagh
Opinion
Elizabeth A. Weaver
Marilyn Kelly
Clifford W. Taylor
Robert P. Young, Jr.
Stephen J. Markman
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
FILED JUNE 4, 2002
T. PAUL KEENAN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v No. 120277
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Defendant-Appellee.
________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff is a prisoner who filed a complaint against
defendant Department of Corrections in a circuit court.
Summary disposition in favor of the defendant was granted by
order of the court under MCR 2.116(C)(8). Plaintiff filed a
claim of appeal with the Court of Appeals which that Court
dismissed because plaintiff had not paid the remainder of a
filing fee due in a prior case filed with the Court of
Appeals. Plaintiff seeks leave to appeal. In lieu of
granting leave to appeal, we affirm.
This case is governed by MCL 600.2963. Subsection 3 of
that section requires a prisoner filing a civil action or
appeal to pay a certain partial filing fee based on activity
in the prisoner’s institutional account for the preceding
twelve months. Subsection 5 creates a procedure for the
Department of Corrections to collect the remaining portion of
the filing fee in monthly installments from the prisoner’s
account. Key to the instant dispute is subsection 8, which
indicates:
A prisoner who has failed to pay outstanding
fees and costs as required under this section shall
not commence a new civil action or appeal until the
outstanding fees and costs have been paid.
Plaintiff argues that he has not “failed” to pay
outstanding fees because the remainder of the filing fee is
being taken out of his account on a monthly basis under
subsection 5. This argument is inconsistent with the plain
wording of the statute. Subsection 8 conditions future
appeals in civil actions on payment of “outstanding fees and
costs” in prior actions. The term “outstanding fees” refers
to the difference between the full filing fee and the partial
filing fee set under subsection 3. Plaintiff concedes that he
still owes a portion of the filing fee in the prior case.
Accordingly, the Court of Appeals correctly dismissed his
claim of appeal. In lieu of granting leave to appeal, we
affirm the order of the Court of Appeals on this point. In
all other respects, we deny the delayed application for leave
2
to appeal because we are not persuaded that the remaining
questions should be reviewed by this Court.
CORRIGAN , C.J., and CAVANAGH , WEAVER , KELLY , TAYLOR , YOUNG , and
MARKMAN , JJ., concurred.
3