Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 17 / Act 2 of 1921
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 17.6 (2026)

Repealed. 1984, Act 431, Eff. Mar. 29, 1985.

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

STATE ADMINISTRATIVE BOARD


Act 2 of 1921


17.6 Repealed. 1984, Act 431, Eff. Mar. 29, 1985.

    Repealed. 1984, Act 431, Eff. Mar. 29, 1985.

Compiler's Notes:

    The repealed section pertained to powers of administrative board.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 33 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1950–2024 · leading case: House Speaker v. State Admin. Bd., 495 N.W.2d 539 (Mich. 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
House Speaker v. State Admin. Bd., 495 N.W.2d 539 (Mich. 1993). · cites it 12× “] [7] MCL 17.6(1); MSA 3.265(1), originally enacted in 1921 along with MCL 17.”
Wehmeier v. W. E. Wood Co., 139 N.W.2d 733 (Mich. 1966). · cites it 6× “5 (Stat Ann 1960 Rev § 17.6[11]). Pursuant to the rule-making powers given to the department (CL 1948, § 413.”
People v. Tanner, 853 N.W.2d 653 (Mich. 2014). “Thus, in my view, Cavanaugh evidences that this Court did not interpret the Michigan Constitution to prohibit only confessions obtained by “inflicting physical force” or “cruel treatment.”
Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Emmanuel Baptist Preschool, 455 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 1990). · cites it 2× “[Nowak, Rotunda & Young, Constitutional Law (3d ed), § 17.6, p 1069. Emphasis added.] [17] If the exemption were granted, the result could be substantial deregulation of childcare centers.”
Carter v. Gen. Motors Corp., 106 N.W.2d 105 (Mich. 1960). · cites it 2× “11 [Stat Ann 1959 Cum Supp, § 17.6(17)]) provides that the "decision of a majority of the board shall be the decision of the board".”
Loucks v. Bauman, 97 N.W.2d 321 (Mich. 1959). · cites it 3× “10, Stat Ann 1957 Cum Supp § 17.6[16]). — REPORTER. [*] That the reader may appraise this "reference," the appeal board's complete order (not its opinion on review which is carefully confined to the questions counsel presented before it) is margin-quoted as follows: "This cause…”
Jordan v. CA Roberts Co., 150 N.W.2d 792 (Mich. 1967). · cites it 2× “9, as amended by PA 1965, No 139 (Stat Ann 1965 Cum Supp § 17.6 [15]), CLS 1961, § 408.10 (Stat Ann 1960 Rev § 17.”
Moore v. Fed. Dep't Stores, Inc., 190 N.W.2d 262 (Mich. Ct. App. 1971). “1 (Stat Ann 1968 Rev §17.141). After the start of this litigation the Act was revamped and new seetion numbers were assigned.”
Richardson v. Grezeszak, 99 N.W.2d 648 (Mich. 1959). · cites it 2× “See, generally, 2 Harper and James, Torts, § 17.6 at pp 1007-1011. In our State, the fact that a municipal ordinance has been violated has been held *237 only evidence of negligence, not negligence per se, * †' although as is noted in Prosser, Torts (2d ed), § 34, the prevailing…”
Coates v. Cont'l Motors Corp., 130 N.W.2d 34 (Mich. 1964). “[Stat Ann 1960 Rev § 17.6(7) et seg.]).— Reporter. 5 CLS 1961, § 417.”
Herman v. Theis, 160 N.W.2d 365 (Mich. Ct. App. 1968). “…commission are now vested in the workmen’s compensation department. See CLS 1961, § 108.1 et seq. (Stat Ann 1960 Eev § 17.6[7] et seq.).”
Austin v. W. Biddle Walker Co., 161 N.W.2d 150 (Mich. Ct. App. 1968). · cites it 2× “76 plus interest from the dates the individual payments were due. [2] The workmen's compensation appeal board is the successor administrative agency to the appellate jurisdiction of the industrial accident board.”
Show all 33 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 17.6(1) — 2 cases
House Speaker v. State Admin. Bd., 495 N.W.2d 539 (Mich. 1993). “] [7] MCL 17.6(1); MSA 3.265(1), originally enacted in 1921 along with MCL 17.”
Moore v. Fed. Dep't Stores, Inc., 190 N.W.2d 262 (Mich. Ct. App. 1971). “1 (Stat Ann 1968 Rev §17.141). After the start of this litigation the Act was revamped and new seetion numbers were assigned.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 17.6(17) — 2 cases
Carter v. Gen. Motors Corp., 106 N.W.2d 105 (Mich. 1960). “11 [Stat Ann 1959 Cum Supp, § 17.6(17)]) provides that the "decision of a majority of the board shall be the decision of the board".”
Kozlowski v. Chrysler Corp., 220 N.W.2d 319 (Mich. Ct. App. 1974).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 17.6(2) — 1 case
House Speaker v. State Admin. Bd., 495 N.W.2d 539 (Mich. 1993). “] [7] MCL 17.6(1); MSA 3.265(1), originally enacted in 1921 along with MCL 17.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 17.6(3) — 1 case
House Speaker v. State Admin. Bd., 495 N.W.2d 539 (Mich. 1993). “] [7] MCL 17.6(1); MSA 3.265(1), originally enacted in 1921 along with MCL 17.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 17.6(5) — 1 case
House Speaker v. State Admin. Bd., 495 N.W.2d 539 (Mich. 1993). “] [7] MCL 17.6(1); MSA 3.265(1), originally enacted in 1921 along with MCL 17.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 17.6(7) — 3 cases
Coates v. Cont'l Motors Corp., 130 N.W.2d 34 (Mich. 1964). “[Stat Ann 1960 Rev § 17.6(7) et seg.]).— Reporter. 5 CLS 1961, § 417.”
Lane v. Jones, 147 N.W.2d 420 (Mich. Ct. App. 1967).
McLemore v. M. S. Knee Co., 144 N.W.2d 647 (Mich. Ct. App. 1966).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 17.6(8) — 1 case
Bonkowski v. Michigan Chrome & Chem. Co., 137 N.W.2d 775 (Mich. Ct. App. 1965).
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.