Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 123.1018 (2026)

Judicial review.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION

Act 191 of 1968

123.1018 Judicial review.

Sec. 18.

Every final decision by the commission shall be subject to judicial review in a manner prescribed in Act No. 197 of the Public Acts of 1952, as amended, being sections 24.101 to 24.110 of the Compiled Laws of 1948.

History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1977–2022 · leading case: Midland Twp. v. State Boundary Comm'n, 259 N.W.2d 326 (Mich. 1977).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Midland Twp. v. State Boundary Comm'n, 259 N.W.2d 326 (Mich. 1977). · cites it 2× “The 1968 act further provides (MCLA 123.1018; MSA 5.2242[18]) that every final decision of the commission shall be subject to judicial review in a manner prescribed in the 1952 act.”

Casco Twp. v. State Boundary Comm'n, 622 N.W.2d 332 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “Where an administrative agency exceeds its statutory authority or jurisdiction, the reviewing court should set aside the agency’s decision or order if the agency prejudiced the petitioner’s substantial rights. MCL 24.306(l)(b); MSA 3.”

Avon Twp. v. State Boundary Comm'n, 293 N.W.2d 691 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). “, as incorporated by reference in the act creating the Boundary Commission, 1968 PA 191 , § 18; MCL 123.1018; MSA 5.2242(18). Under the provisions of MCL 24.”

Twp. of Hopkins v. State Boundary Comm'n (Mich. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 3× “The Commission argued that plaintiffs had no independent right to sue it in the Court of Claims, but had the right to judicial review in circuit court after a final administrative decision, pursuant to § 18 of the SBCA, MCL 123.1018. On October 1, 2020, the Court of Claims…”

Chase v. State Boundary Comm'n, 303 N.W.2d 186 (Mich. Ct. App. 1981). “, as incorporated by reference in the state boundary commission act, MCL 123.1018; MSA 5.2242(18). The courts are instructed by statute as follows: "Sec.”

Teridee LLC v. Charter Twp. of Haring (Mich. 2017). “” 15 We must also determine whether the decisions, findings, and rulings “are supported by competent, material and substantial evidence on the whole record,” 16 remaining sensitive to the deference owed to administrative expertise and not invading exclusive administrative…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.