Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 14 / R.S. of 1846
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 14.28 (2026)

Representation of state; designation of solicitor general.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Revised Statutes of 1846


R.S. of 1846


14.28 Representation of state; designation of solicitor general.

Sec. 28.

    The attorney general shall prosecute and defend all actions in the supreme court, in which the state shall be interested, or a party; he may, in his discretion, designate one of the assistant attorneys general to be known as the solicitor general, who, under his direction, shall have charge of such causes in the supreme court and shall perform such other duties as may be assigned to him; and the attorney general shall also, when requested by the governor, or either branch of the legislature, and may, when in his own judgment the interests of the state require it, intervene in and appear for the people of this state in any other court or tribunal, in any cause or matter, civil or criminal, in which the people of this state may be a party or interested.

History: R.S. 1846, Ch. 12 ;-- CL 1857, 180 ;-- CL 1871, 255 ;-- How. 286 ;-- CL 1897, 104 ;-- CL 1915, 132 ;-- Am. 1921, Act 394, Eff. Aug. 18, 1921 ;-- CL 1929, 176 ;-- Am. 1939, Act 144, Imd. Eff. May 26, 1939 ;-- CL 1948, 14.28

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 56 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1949–2025 · leading case: Federated Ins. v. Oakland Cnty. Road Comm'n, 715 N.W.2d 846 (Mich. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Federated Ins. v. Oakland Cnty. Road Comm'n, 715 N.W.2d 846 (Mich. 2006). · cites it 12× “Similarly, MCL 14.28 states: The Attorney General shall prosecute and defend all actions in the supreme court, in which the state shall be interested, or a party; he may, in his discretion, designate one of the assistant attorneys general to be known as the solicitor general,…”
Rohde v. Ann Arbor Pub. Schs., 737 N.W.2d 158 (Mich. 2007). · cites it 4× “101 and MCL 14.28 did not give the Attorney General standing to intervene to appeal the Court of Appeals judgment, because the Attorney General did not represent an "aggrieved party.”
People v. Unger, 749 N.W.2d 272 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008). “” MCL 14.28. It is beyond dispute that the people of the state of Michigan are a party to felony prosecutions in this state.”
Attorney Gen. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 625 N.W.2d 16 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 4× “[MCL 14.28; MSA 3.181.] MCL 14.101; MSA 3.”
People of Michigan v. William Lawrence Rucker, 919 N.W.2d 802 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “5 MCL 14.28 6 See People v. Wiley , unpublished order of the Court of Appeals, entered November 1, 2017 (Docket No.”
People of Michigan v. Susan Hernandez-Zitka, 922 N.W.2d 696 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “2 In re Certified Question involved the interpretation of MCL 14.28, which grants the attorney general the authority to represent and intervene in actions on behalf of the state, as supplemented by the authority granted in MCL 14.”
Shirvell v. Dep't of Attorney Gen., 308 Mich. App. 702 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 3× “Critically, in this case, unlike the employee in Rankin, Shirvell’s position as an assistant attorney general required him to make public appearances in court as a representative for all the state’s citizens.”
Fieger v. Cox, 734 N.W.2d 602 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “” In re Certified Question (Wayne Co v Phillip Morris, Inc), 465 Mich 537, 543 ; 638 NW2d 409 (2002), citing MCL 14.28. 9 *466 As this Court further observed in People v Karalla, 35 Mich App 541, 544 ; 192 NW2d 676 (1971), “the Attorney General possesses all the powers of a…”
In Re Certified Question From US Dist. Court, 638 N.W.2d 409 (Mich. 2002). · cites it 3× “may, when in his own judgment the interests of the state require it, intervene in and appear for the people of this state in any other court or tribunal, in any cause or matter, civil or criminal, in which the people of this state may be a party or interested.”
Priorities USA v. Dana Nessel, 978 F.3d 976 (6th Cir. 2020). · cites it 2× “MCL § 14.28. Of course, the United States has arguably stronger language in its regulations that “assigned” the Office of the Solicitor General to defend cases against the United States, 28 C.”
Hartman v. Ins. Co. of North Am., 308 N.W.2d 625 (Mich. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 2× “181 designates the Attorney General to "intervene in and appear for the people of this state in any * * * court or tribunal, in any cause or matter, civil or criminal, in which the people of this state may be a party or interested”.”
Michigan Educ. Ass'n v. Superintendent of Pub. Instruction, 724 N.W.2d 478 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “101 and MCL 14.28. Id. at 293-294 . While both relying on and further expanding its discussion of standing in Nat’l Wildlife, our Supreme Court held that the Attorney General had no authority to intervene to appeal the Court of Appeals judgment under these statutes because a…”
Show all 56 citing cases →
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.