Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 141 / Act 94 of 1933
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 141.102 (2026)

Construction of act.

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

THE REVENUE BOND ACT OF 1933


Act 94 of 1933


141.102 Construction of act.

Sec. 2.

    This act shall be construed as cumulative authority for the exercise of the powers herein granted and shall not be construed to repeal any existing laws with respect thereto, it being the purpose and intention of this act to create full and complete additional and alternate methods for the exercise of such powers. The powers conferred by this act shall not be affected or limited by any other statute or by any charter, except as otherwise herein provided. The functions, powers and duties of the state commissioner of health in connection with any such public improvement shall remain unaffected by this act.

History: 1933, Act 94, Imd. Eff. May 26, 1933 ;-- Am. 1946, 1st Ex. Sess., Act 23, Eff. June 7, 1946 ;-- CL 1948, 141.102

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1953–2020 · leading case: Alan v. Wayne Cnty., 200 N.W.2d 628 (Mich. 1972).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Alan v. Wayne Cnty., 200 N.W.2d 628 (Mich. 1972). · cites it 2× “2741; MCLA 141.102; MSA 5.2732. [54] Some of these statutes are referred to in footnote 47, above.”
NL Ventures VI Farmington, LLC v. City of Livonia, 886 N.W.2d 772 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015). “Construction of the Bond Act is governed by MCL 141.102, which states that “the purpose and intention of this act [is] to create full and complete additional and alternate methods for the exercise of such powers.”
City of North Muskegon v. Bolema Constr. Co., 56 N.W.2d 371 (Mich. 1953). “The act in question provides among other matters: Section 2 of said act (CL 1948, § 141.102 [Stat Ann 1949 Rev § 5.2732]), provides: “This act shall be construed as cumulative authority for the exercise of the powers therein granted.”
Governale v. City of Owosso, 190 N.W.2d 274 (Mich. Ct. App. 1971). · cites it 2× “By the provisions of MCLA § 141.102 (Stat Ann 1969 Rev § 5.2732), an ordinance which meets the requirements of MCLA § 141.”
Eric M Hartfiel v. City of Eastpointe (Mich. Ct. App. 2020). “Under plaintiff’s interpretation of these statutes, a landowner could lease a property to a tenant for a short period of time pursuant to an agreement requiring the tenant to pay charges and continue to receive the benefit of exemption from liens under MCL 123.”
Yurek v. City of Sterling Heights, 194 N.W.2d 474 (Mich. Ct. App. 1971). · cites it 2× “3 MCLA § 141.102 (Stat Ann 1969 Rev § 5.2732), provides that powers conferred by the revenue bond act shall not be affected or limited by any other statute or charter unless otherwise provided in this enactment.”
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.