Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 168.869 (2026)

Commencement of recount; delay; expenses of local recount.

✓ 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

168.869 Commencement of recount; delay; expenses of local recount.

Sec. 869.

A recount must not be commenced until the board of county canvassers determines, by communicating with the secretary of state in a form and manner as provided by the secretary of state, that a petition has not been filed requesting a recount by the board of state canvassers of ballots cast in the same district. If the board of county canvassers is advised by the secretary of state that a petition has been filed with the secretary of state praying for a recount by the board of state canvassers of the ballots cast in the same county or district, then no action must be taken on the recount until the board of county canvassers receives instructions from the board of state canvassers. Nothing contained in this section shall act to delay any recount of the ballots cast at any city, ward, township, or village election if the ballots cast at that election are not sealed in the same ballot containers with the state and county offices. For any recount of ballots cast in any city, ward, township, village, school, or district election, the board of county canvassers shall charge the appropriate local unit the actual and necessary expenses of conducting the recount, and the local unit shall pay those charges to the county treasurer.

History: 1954, Act 116, Eff. June 1, 1955 ;-- Am. 1963, 2nd Ex. Sess., Act 38, Imd. Eff. Dec. 27, 1963 ;-- Am. 2024, Act 74, Eff. Apr. 2, 2025

PopularName Notes:

Election Code

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2022–2025 · leading case: Tom J Barrow v. Wayne Cnty. Bd. of Canvassers (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Tom J Barrow v. Wayne Cnty. Bd. of Canvassers (Mich. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 13× “On appeal, plaintiff argues that the trial court abused its discretion in denying his motions because MCL 168.869 places a clear legal duty on defendant to investigate his claims of fraud.”

20250218_C370776_46_370776.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 5× “872 provides that when it “shall appear to the board of canvassers having jurisdiction over said recount that there is probably cause to believe that there has been fraud, wrongdoing or a violation of the law in respect to said election .”

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.