Rule 3.704.Dismissal
Subchapter 3.700 — Personal Protection and Extreme Risk Protection Proceedings · Last verified September 5, 2026
Full Text of Rule 3.704
Plain-English Summary
MCR 3.704 is two sentences long, and each does one job. The first names the route by which a pending personal protection action ordinarily comes to an end without an order. The second makes that route free.
Only the petitioner, only by motion
The rule permits dismissal upon motion by the petitioner. That places the decision with the party seeking protection rather than with the party to be restrained, and it requires a filing rather than an informal request. A respondent who wants the case to go away does not have a dismissal route under this rule.
Only before an order issues
The timing limit is the other half of the first sentence: dismissal is available prior to the issuance of an order. Once a personal protection order has been entered, the case has passed the point this rule addresses, and what follows entry belongs to the later rules on modification, termination, and enforcement. Reading MCR 3.704 as a general exit ramp misses that boundary. It covers the window between filing and issuance, and nothing after it.
The two carve outs
The rule opens by excepting MCR 3.705(A)(5) and (B). Both sit inside the issuance rule, and both give the court a way to end a personal protection action that does not run through the petitioner. Under MCR 3.705(A)(5) and MCR 3.705(B)(1), a court that determines after interviewing the petitioner that the claims are sufficiently without merit may dismiss the action without a hearing. Under MCR 3.705(B)(4), a court may dismiss the petition if the petitioner does not attend the hearing. A reader who stops at MCR 3.704 will come away thinking the petitioner alone controls dismissal, and the cross reference exists to correct that impression.
No fee
The last sentence removes any charge for the motion, matching the cost structure that runs through this subchapter. Under MCR 3.703(A) a petitioner pays nothing to start a protective action, and under this rule pays nothing to withdraw it.
Taken together, the pieces describe a narrow rule with a clear function. Apart from the exceptions it names, it leaves the decision to end a pending protective action with the petitioner, it keeps that decision to the window before an order issues, and it keeps money out of it entirely.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who can dismiss a Michigan PPO case before an order is entered?
The petitioner. The rule permits dismissal upon motion by the petitioner prior to the issuance of an order, and excepts MCR 3.705(A)(5) and (B).
Is there a fee to dismiss a personal protection action?
No. The rule states that there is no fee for such a motion.
Can a respondent move to dismiss a PPO petition?
MCR 3.704 does not provide that route. It names the petitioner as the party who may move for dismissal, and it limits the motion to the period before an order issues.
Can a PPO case be dismissed after the order has been entered?
Not under this rule, which reaches only the period prior to the issuance of an order. A challenge to an order already entered runs under MCR 3.707, the rule on modification, termination, and extension, rather than under this one.
Can the court dismiss a PPO petition on its own?
MCR 3.704 excepts MCR 3.705(A)(5) and (B). Under MCR 3.705(A)(5) and MCR 3.705(B)(1), a court that determines after interviewing the petitioner that the claims are sufficiently without merit may dismiss the action without a hearing. Under MCR 3.705(B)(4), a court may dismiss the petition if the petitioner does not attend the hearing. Anyone relying on MCR 3.704 alone should read those provisions with it.