Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 168 / Act 116 of 1954
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 168.557 (2026)

Repealed. 2002, Act 163, Imd. Eff. Apr. 9, 2002.

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

MICHIGAN ELECTION LAW


Act 116 of 1954


168.557 Repealed. 2002, Act 163, Imd. Eff. Apr. 9, 2002.

    Repealed. 2002, Act 163, Imd. Eff. Apr. 9, 2002.

Compiler's Notes:

    The repealed section pertained to requirements for nominating petitions.

PopularName Notes:

Election Code
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1964–2018 · leading case: Citizens Protecting Michigan's Constitution v. Sec'y of State, 921 N.W.2d 247 (Mich. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Citizens Protecting Michigan's Constitution v. Sec'y of State, 921 N.W.2d 247 (Mich. 2018). · cites it 4× “However, the plain language of the VNP proposal requires applicants to attest under oath that they meet the qualifications “set forth in this section; and” indicate their party affiliation, if any. VNP proposal, art 4, § 6(2)(A)(III) (emphasis added).”
Advisory Opinion on Constitutionality of 1975 PA 227, 242 N.W.2d 3 (Mich. 1976). “We believe they are more analogous to affidavits required by MCLA 168.557; MSA 6.1557 (change of *511 name) and MCLA 168.”
Sullivan v. Sec'y of State, 130 N.W.2d 392 (Mich. 1964). · cites it 2× “1561(1)]), added by PA 1960, No 88, providing that when a candidate for nomination to any public office has the same given name and surname as the person last elected to such office when that person does not seek renomination, a statement must be printed below the name of such…”
Evans v. City of Detroit Election Comm'n, 166 N.W.2d 467 (Mich. Ct. App. 1968). · cites it 2× “1561(1)]), added by PA 1960, No 88, providing that when a candidate for nomination to any public office has the same given name and surname as the person last elected to such office when that person does not seek renomination, a statement must be printed below the name of such…”
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.