Michigan Compiled Laws
Mich. Comp. Laws § 125.1508 (2026)
Repealed. 1999, Act 245, Eff. July 31, 2001.
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
STILLE-DEROSSETT-HALE SINGLE STATE CONSTRUCTION CODE ACT
Act 230 of 1972
125.1508 Repealed. 1999, Act 245, Eff. July 31, 2001.
Repealed. 1999, Act 245, Eff. July 31, 2001.
Compiler's Notes:
The repealed section pertained to applicability of act and state construction code.
PopularName Notes:
Act 230PopularName Notes:
Uniform Construction CodeNotes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases, 1973–1998 · leading case: Frericks v. Highland Twp., 579 N.W.2d 441 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998).
Frericks v. Highland Twp., 579 N.W.2d 441 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998). “MCL 125.1508; MSA 5.2949(8). Under the section of the State Construction Code Act upon which plaintiffs rely in support of their preemption claim (MCL 125.”
Square Lake Hills Condo. Ass'n v. Bloomfield Twp., 471 N.W.2d 321 (Mich. 1991). “Therefore, we deem it unnecessary to consider the preemption argument and decline to do so.”
Northville Twp. v. Coyne, 429 N.W.2d 185 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988). “2949(23)(l)(b), made mandatory by MCL 125.1508; MSA 5.2949(8). Under the State Construction Code, the violation of a building permit requirement is punishable by fine of not more than $500 or imprisonment of not more than ninety days or both.”
Lanphear v. Antwerp Twp., 214 N.W.2d 66 (Mich. Ct. App. 1973). “” MCLA 125.1508; MSA 5.2949(8). Other provisions dealing with mobile homes in the new act are MCLA 125.”
City of Warren v. State Constr. Code Comm'n, 239 N.W.2d 640 (Mich. Ct. App. 1976). “2949(5)(3) through (7), MCLA 125.1508(5), (6); MSA 5.2949(8X5), (6), MCLA 125.”
Ypsilanti Twp. v. Edward Rose Bldg. Co., 315 N.W.2d 196 (Mich. Ct. App. 1981). “*71 Under MCL 125.1508; MSA 5.2949(8), plaintiff Ypsilanti Township had the option of exempting itself from the State Construction Code Act and the rules promulgated thereunder, and could have adopted another nationally recognized model building code.”
Moore v. City of Detroit, 382 N.W.2d 482 (Mich. Ct. App. 1985). “ed to the commission, unless the commission determines after a public hearing that the codes, as amended, do not adequately protect the health, safety, or welfare of the people of the governmental subdivision, or that the amendments tend to unnecessarily increase construction…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 125.1508(1) — 1 case
Moore v. City of Detroit, 382 N.W.2d 482 (Mich. Ct. App. 1985). “ed to the commission, unless the commission determines after a public hearing that the codes, as amended, do not adequately protect the health, safety, or welfare of the people of the governmental subdivision, or that the amendments tend to unnecessarily increase construction…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 125.1508(5) — 1 case
City of Warren v. State Constr. Code Comm'n, 239 N.W.2d 640 (Mich. Ct. App. 1976). “2949(5)(3) through (7), MCLA 125.1508(5), (6); MSA 5.2949(8X5), (6), MCLA 125.”
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.