Michigan Appeals Court Upheld Class Action Dismissal

The court ruled that individual claims may proceed after dismissing class-wide allegations in a recent lawsuit.

Updated on Oct. 7, 2026 in Insurance

Bold flat-color editorial illustration of a heavy stone plinth against a neutral background, representing the structural weight of judicial procedural law. — The Michigan Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal of class-action claims in a recent lawsuit, ruling that individual plaintiffs may continue their legal proceedings. AI Illustration. Upload story photo >

Live Poll

Should courts permit class action lawsuits for violations of consumer protection statutes?

The Michigan Court of Appeals has affirmed the dismissal of class action claims against approximately three dozen defendants. While the class components were rejected, the court ruled that the individual claims may continue, remanding the case for further proceedings.

Why it matters

The ruling clarifies the application of MCR 3.501(A)(5), which restricts class actions for statutes mandating minimum recovery amounts that lack express class authorization. This decision ensures that while class-wide litigation may be barred, individual plaintiffs retain their right to seek legal remedies.

The Michigan Court of Appeals dismissed class-wide claims while allowing the eight counts asserted by the plaintiffs to proceed individually. This follows the court's interpretation that the Occupational Code and Regulation of Collection Practices Act do not explicitly permit class actions.

The players

Michigan Court of Appeals

This is an intermediate appellate court that hears appeals from circuit courts and various administrative agencies across the state.

Michigan Supreme Court

This is the state's highest judicial body which possesses the authority to review and vacate decisions made by lower appellate courts.

The details

The court held that MCR 3.501(A)(5) precludes class actions for statutes providing minimum recovery amounts without explicit authorization. Consequently, the court vacated the earlier dismissal of individual claims, allowing those parts of the suit to continue in the legal system.

2022: The Rodriguez I case established precedent regarding MCR 3.501(A) class actions.
2024: The Michigan Supreme Court vacated the Rodriguez I ruling.
October 6, 2026: The Michigan Court of Appeals issued the current ruling.

Legal Context

This decision refines how Michigan courts apply MCR 3.501(A)(5) when litigants seek class-wide recovery under statutes lacking specific class action authorization. By following the legal framework established in Rodriguez v Hirshberg Acceptance Corp, the court provides clearer guidance on the distinction between collective and individual litigation rights.

Residents involved in collection disputes should be aware that their ability to pursue claims individually remains intact despite barriers to collective class action lawsuits. This decision impacts how consumers navigate legal challenges regarding the Occupational Code and Regulation of Collection Practices Act.

The takeaway

The court's decision underscores that statutory limits on class actions do not inherently invalidate a plaintiff's right to pursue damages individually. Readers should consult with legal counsel to determine if their specific grievance qualifies for individual litigation even if class-wide relief is barred.