MICHAEL WAYNE KOMEJAN V DEPT OF CORRECTIONS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
MICHAEL WAYNE KOMEJAN,
FOR PUBLICATION
March 23, 2006
9:15 a.m.
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 257681
Ingham Circuit Court
LC No. 04-000358-CZ
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Defendant-Appellant.
Official Reported Version
Before: Smolenski, P.J., Whitbeck, C.J., and O'Connell, J.
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals as of right the trial court's order requiring it to modify plaintiff 's basic
information report (BIR) to reflect that plaintiff had no criminal sexual conduct convictions.
Specifically, defendant appeals the trial court's denial of its motion for summary disposition,
which argued that plaintiff 's failure to follow reporting procedures rendered the suit invalid and
subject to immediate dismissal. We agree and reverse. We review de novo a trial court's
decision to grant summary disposition. Maiden v Rozwood, 461 Mich 109, 118; 597 NW2d 817
(1999).
As an initial matter, plaintiff was a "prisoner" at all relevant times under the definition
contained in MCL 600.5531(e). Before the BIR was completed, plaintiff pleaded guilty of five
crimes related to distributing child pornography with a computer. Therefore, he was "a person
subject to incarceration, detention, or admission to a prison who is accused of [or] convicted of .
. . violations of state or local law . . . ." MCL 600.5531(e).
A prisoner who brings a civil action regarding "any conditions of confinement or the
effects of an act or omission of government officials, employees, or agents in the performance of
their duties," MCL 600.5531(a), must disclose, at the suit's commencement, the number of civil
actions he or she has previously initiated, MCL 600.5507(2). If a prisoner fails to disclose the
number of previous suits, the statute explicitly instructs the court to dismiss the action. MCL
600.5507(3)(b). Plaintiff did not disclose the number of civil actions relating to prison
conditions that he had previously pursued, so the trial court should have dismissed this suit. The
fact that plaintiff had never pursued a civil action before does not excuse his lack of disclosure
because "a prisoner is obligated to disclose . . . the number of civil actions and appeals he had
previously initiated, even when that number is zero." Tomzek v Dep't of Corrections, 258 Mich
-1-
App 222, 224-225; 672 NW2d 511 (2003). Plaintiff 's failure to disclose the number of previous
civil actions he commenced mandates the dismissal of this case.1
Reversed.
/s/ Michael R. Smolenski
/s/ William C. Whitbeck
/s/ Peter D. O'Connell
1
Although we recognize that plaintiff is currently on parole, he has not been discharged.
Therefore, the contentious BIR might still play a part in defendant's administration of plaintiff,
and the issue is not yet moot. An issue is not automatically rendered moot merely because its
ramifications are partially or potentially alleviated. To hold that the issue is moot is to require
defendant to maintain a judicially altered BIR as part of plaintiff 's records. Unless plaintiff
follows the appropriate procedures for obtaining the remedy he seeks, we see no reason to grant
him this relief, no matter how unlikely it may be that the relief will ever benefit him.
-2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.