Opinion ID: 1228401
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: the need for change

Text: Without disputing the logic supporting the rule we are persuaded our jurisprudence is no longer served well by it. Civil suits, by and large, are contested claims among individuals. Criminal cases involve a charged offense against the whole people of the state. While the same conduct often affronts society and gives rise to claim in an individual on account of it, the considerations and purposes of the separate procedures for redressing the respective wrongs are disparate and both procedures are diminished by ignoring the differences. A litigant should not be burdened in adjudicating his civil rights according to how or whether he has satisfied the claim against him by society. Likewise the speedy determinations of society's claims against individuals should not be influenced by a rule of civil procedure which puts a premium on the mode of response to society's charge. In addition, the successive changes in the General Court Rules, the statutes, and decisions whereby the plea of nolo contendere has achieved acceptability seriously weaken the underpinnings of reason supporting the old rule and we are convinced our practice will be better served by no longer following it. GCR 1963 111.2; GCR 1963, 785.7 eff June 1, 1973; MCLA 767.37; MSA 28.977 as amended by 1969 PA 334; People v Tomlinson, 50 Mich App 655; 213 NW2d 803 (1973); People v Curry, 48 Mich App 545; 210 NW2d 791 (1973). Compare People v Franchi, 3 Mich App 511; 142 NW2d 881 (1966).