On October 5, 2016, the Court heard oral argument on the application for leave to appeal the June 11, 2015 judgment of the
If the parties are not able to resolve the dispute through settlement discussions, the date of the filing of the mediator's status report shall be considered the date leave to appeal is GRANTED, for purposes of the briefing deadlines for calendar cases. 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 600.8271 creates an independent funding obligation; (3) whether the 45th District Court is "within" the political subdivisions of appellants or whether "the expenses of maintaining, financing, or operating the district court ... were incurred in" the political subdivisions of appellants within the meaning of MCL 600.8103(3), MCL 600.8104(2), or both; (4) if so, whether City of Oak Park is currently funding "the expenses of maintaining, financing, or operating the district court ... incurred in any other political subdivision"; and (5) whether the 45th District Court may rescind its agreement with appellants that the district court is not required to sit in appellants' political subdivisions.
The Attorney General, the Michigan District Judges Association, the Michigan Court Administrators Association, the Michigan Municipal League and the Michigan Townships Association are invited to file briefs amicus curiae. Other persons or groups interested in the determination of the issues presented in this case may move the Court for permission to file briefs amicus curiae.
MARKMAN and LARSEN, JJ., would grant leave to appeal only.