Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
17 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 1974–2026 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Michigan courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Ray Township v. B & BS Gun Clubgreen2 sentences2015TITLE-BODY CHALLENGE To the extent that defendant brings a title-body challenge, he must demonstrate “that the title of [SORA] does not adequately express its contents,” Ray Twp, 226 Mich App at 728 , such that “the body exceeds the scope of the title,” Coalition Protecting Auto No-Fault v Mich Catastrophic Claims Ass’n, 305 Mich App 301, 314 ; 852 NW2d 229 (2014) (CPAN) (quotation marks and citation omitted). 2002In regard to a title-body challenge, we have noted that “ ‘[t]he title of an act must express the general propose or object of the act.’ ” HJ Tucker & Associates, Inc v Allied Chucker & Engineering Co, 234 Mich App 550, 559 ; 595 NW2d 176 (1999), quoting Ray Twp v B & BS Gun Club, 226 Mich App 724, 728 ; 575 NW2d 63 (1997). | 1 | 4 |
People v. Boscagreen2 sentences2018In Bosca , this Court stated that to succeed on a title-body challenge, a party must demonstrate that the title of the act "does not adequately express its contents ... such that the body exceeds the scope of the title." Bosca , 310 Mich.App. at 83 , 871 N.W.2d 307 (quotation marks and citations omitted). 2018In Bosca , this Court stated that to succeed on a title-body challenge, a party must demonstrate that the title of the act "does not adequately express its contents ... such that the body exceeds the scope of the title." Bosca , 310 Mich.App. at 83 , 871 N.W.2d 307 (quotation marks and citations omitted). | 1 | 2 |
People v. Cynargreen2 sentences2013In Cynar, 252 Mich App at 84-85 , this Court explained: In regard to a title-body challenge, we have noted that “ ‘[t]he title of an act must express the general purpose or object of the act.’ ” However, we also recognized that “the title of an act need not be an index to all the provisions of the act.” Instead, the test is merely “whether the title gives fair notice to the legislators and the public of the challenged provision.” It is only “ ‘where the subjects are so diverse in nature that they have no necessary connection,’ ” that we will find the fair notice aspect has been violated. [Cita 2013See Cynar, 252 Mich App at 84 (analyzing a title-body challenge to an act under the Title-Object Clause by comparing the subject of the title of the act to the subject of the provisions contained within the act itself). | 1 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Kevorkian
green
2 sentences2026TITLE-BODY CHALLENGE A title-body challenge claims “that the title of the act does not adequately express the content of the law.” People v Kevorkian, 447 Mich 436, 453 ; 527 NW2d 714 (1994). 2026TITLE-BODY CHALLENGE A title-body challenge claims “that the title of the act does not adequately express the content of the law.” People v Kevorkian, 447 Mich 436, 453 ; 527 NW2d 714 (1994). | 5 | 1998–2026 |
People v. Milton
green
2 sentences1975The Michigan Supreme Court has held, in People v Milton, 393 Mich 234 ; 224 NW2d 266 (1974), "that the district court act does not violate the title-body clause”. 1975The Michigan Supreme Court has held, in People v Milton, 393 Mich 234 ; 224 NW2d 266 (1974), "that the district court act does not violate the title-body clause”. | 3 | 1975–1975 |
Wayne County Board of Commissioners v. Wayne County Airport Authority
green
2 sentences2020Wayne Co Bd of Comm’rs, 253 Mich App at 185 . 2015“With regard to a title-body challenge, this Court has indicated that the title of an act must express the general purpose or object of the act.” Wayne Co Bd of Comm’rs, 253 Mich App at 185 . | 2 | 2015–2020 |
TUCKER & ASSOCIATES, INC. v. Allied Chucker Co.
green
2 sentences2014H J Tucker & Assoc, Inc v Allied Chucker & Eng Co, 234 Mich App 550, 559 ; 595 NW2d 176 (1999). [I]t is not necessary that a title be an index of all of an act’s provisions. 2002In regard to a title-body challenge, we have noted that “ ‘[t]he title of an act must express the general propose or object of the act.’ ” HJ Tucker & Associates, Inc v Allied Chucker & Engineering Co, 234 Mich App 550, 559 ; 595 NW2d 176 (1999), quoting Ray Twp v B & BS Gun Club, 226 Mich App 724, 728 ; 575 NW2d 63 (1997). | 2 | 2002–2014 |
H J Tucker & Associates, Inc. v. Allied Chucker & Engineering Co.
green
2 sentences2014H J Tucker & Assoc, Inc v Allied Chucker & Eng Co, 234 Mich App 550, 559 ; 595 NW2d 176 (1999). [I]t is not necessary that a title be an index of all of an act’s provisions. 2002In regard to a title-body challenge, we have noted that “ ‘[t]he title of an act must express the general propose or object of the act.’ ” HJ Tucker & Associates, Inc v Allied Chucker & Engineering Co, 234 Mich App 550, 559 ; 595 NW2d 176 (1999), quoting Ray Twp v B & BS Gun Club, 226 Mich App 724, 728 ; 575 NW2d 63 (1997). | 2 | 2002–2014 |
In re Blakeman
green
1 sentence2026The title need not “serve as an index to all of the provisions of the act.” Enbridge Energy, 332 Mich App at 546 (quotation marks and citation omitted). “[I]t is sufficient that the act centers to one main general object or purpose which the title comprehensively declares, though in general terms, and if provisions in the body of the act not directly mentioned in the title are germane, auxiliary, or 8 “A Hobbesian choice, derived from the theories of political philosopher Thomas Hobbes, is commonly known as a choice between two equally unacceptable alternatives.” In re Blakeman, 326 Mich App a | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Pohutski v. City of Allen Park
green
2 sentences2026The title need not “serve as an index to all of the provisions of the act.” Enbridge Energy, 332 Mich App at 546 (quotation marks and citation omitted). “[I]t is sufficient that the act centers to one main general object or purpose which the title comprehensively declares, though in general terms, and if provisions in the body of the act not directly mentioned in the title are germane, auxiliary, or 8 “A Hobbesian choice, derived from the theories of political philosopher Thomas Hobbes, is commonly known as a choice between two equally unacceptable alternatives.” In re Blakeman, 326 Mich App a 2026The title need not “serve as an index to all of the provisions of the act.” Enbridge Energy, 332 Mich App at 546 (quotation marks and citation omitted). “[I]t is sufficient that the act centers to one main general object or purpose which the title comprehensively declares, though in general terms, and if provisions in the body of the act not directly mentioned in the title are germane, auxiliary, or 8 “A Hobbesian choice, derived from the theories of political philosopher Thomas Hobbes, is commonly known as a choice between two equally unacceptable alternatives.” In re Blakeman, 326 Mich App a | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Coalition Protecting Auto No-Fault v. Michigan Catastrophic Claims Ass'n
green
1 sentence2015TITLE-BODY CHALLENGE To the extent that defendant brings a title-body challenge, he must demonstrate “that the title of [SORA] does not adequately express its contents,” Ray Twp, 226 Mich App at 728 , such that “the body exceeds the scope of the title,” Coalition Protecting Auto No-Fault v Mich Catastrophic Claims Ass’n, 305 Mich App 301, 314 ; 852 NW2d 229 (2014) (CPAN) (quotation marks and citation omitted). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Ace Tex Corp. v. City of Detroit
green
2 sentences2015“Only the general object and not all the details and incidents of a statute need be indicated in the title.” Ace Tex Corp v Detroit, 185 Mich App 609, 616 ; 463 NW2d 166 (1990). [I]t is not necessary that a title be an index of all of an act’s provisions. 2015“Only the general object and not all the details and incidents of a statute need be indicated in the title.” Ace Tex Corp v Detroit, 185 Mich App 609, 616 ; 463 NW2d 166 (1990). [I]t is not necessary that a title be an index of all of an act’s provisions. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
People v. Wade
neutral
2 sentences2013People v Wade, 77 Mich App 554, 559 ; 258 NW2d 750 (1977) (citations omitted). 2013People v Wade, 77 Mich App 554, 559 ; 258 NW2d 750 (1977) (citations omitted). | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Detroit Board of Street Railway Commissioners v. County of Wayne
green
2 sentences1974In Detroit Board of Street Railway Commissioners v Wayne County, 18 Mich App 614, 622-623 ; 171 NW2d 669 (1969), the Court of Appeals rejected a claim of the DSR that a statutory provision imposing liability for ad valorem taxes on public transportation facilities acquired by home rule cities violated the title-body clause because the amendment to the home-rule act imposing the liability should properly have been located in the property tax law: "It might have been better draftsmanship to have placed the provision concerning the taxability of municipal transportation utilities in the general p 1974In Detroit Board of Street Railway Commissioners v Wayne County, 18 Mich App 614, 622-623 ; 171 NW2d 669 (1969), the Court of Appeals rejected a claim of the DSR that a statutory provision imposing liability for ad valorem taxes on public transportation facilities acquired by home rule cities violated the title-body clause because the amendment to the home-rule act imposing the liability should properly have been located in the property tax law: "It might have been better draftsmanship to have placed the provision concerning the taxability of municipal transportation utilities in the general p | 1 | 1974–1974 |
People v. Stanley
green
2 sentences1974Milton responds that the title of the RJA must be read in conjunction with the title of the Code of Criminal Procedure and that when so read "[i]t can only be concluded that each act seeks to define *239 the jurisdiction of courts in their respective spheres; that is, that the Revised Judicature Act defines the jurisdiction of civil courts while the Code of Criminal Procedure defines the jurisdiction of criminal courts. 6 * * * The Revised Judicature Act title speaks generally of jurisdiction, but then proceeds to catalogue purely civil procedure” while "the title to the Code is much more spec 1974Milton responds that the title of the RJA must be read in conjunction with the title of the Code of Criminal Procedure and that when so read "[i]t can only be concluded that each act seeks to define *239 the jurisdiction of courts in their respective spheres; that is, that the Revised Judicature Act defines the jurisdiction of civil courts while the Code of Criminal Procedure defines the jurisdiction of criminal courts. 6 * * * The Revised Judicature Act title speaks generally of jurisdiction, but then proceeds to catalogue purely civil procedure” while "the title to the Code is much more spec | 1 | 1974–1974 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.