Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

Code · Michigan · Chapter 691 — Judiciary

691.1349 Limits of privilege.

462 words·~2 min read·/mi/chapter-691/691-1349

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

691.1349 Limits of privilege.
Sec. 19.
(1)There is no privilege under section 17 for a collaborative law communication that is any of the following:
(a)Available to the public under the freedom of information act, 1976 PA 442, MCL 15.231 to 15.246, or made during a session of a collaborative law process that is open, or is required by law to be open, to the public.
(b)A threat or statement of a plan to inflict bodily injury or commit a crime of violence.
(c)Intentionally used to plan a crime, commit or attempt to commit a crime, or conceal an ongoing crime or ongoing criminal activity.
(d)In an agreement resulting from the collaborative law process, evidenced by a record signed by all parties to the agreement.
(2)The privileges under section 17 for a collaborative law communication do not apply to the extent that a communication is either of the following:
(a)Sought or offered to prove or disprove a claim or complaint of professional misconduct or malpractice arising from or related to a collaborative law process.
(b)Sought or offered to prove or disprove abuse, neglect, abandonment, or exploitation of a child or adult, unless the department of human services is a party to or otherwise participates in the process.
(3)There is no privilege under section 17 if a tribunal finds, after a hearing in camera, that the party seeking discovery or the proponent of the evidence has shown the evidence is not otherwise available, the need for the evidence substantially outweighs the interest in protecting confidentiality, and the collaborative law communication is sought or offered in any of the following:
(a)A court proceeding involving a felony or misdemeanor.
(b)A proceeding seeking rescission or reformation of a contract arising out of the collaborative law process or in which a defense to avoid liability on the contract is asserted.
(4)If a collaborative law communication is subject to an exception under subsection
(2)or (3), only the part of the communication necessary for the application of the exception may be disclosed or admitted.
(5)Disclosure or admission of evidence excepted from the privilege under subsection
(2)or
(3)does not make the evidence or any other collaborative law communication discoverable or admissible for any other purpose.
(6)The privileges under section 17 do not apply if the parties agree in advance in a signed record, or if a record of a proceeding reflects agreement by the parties, that all or part of a collaborative law process is not privileged. This subsection does not apply to a collaborative law communication made by a person that did not receive actual notice of the agreement before the communication was made.
History: 2014, Act 159 , Eff. Dec. 8, 2014
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.