Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 2 / Act 78 of 1945
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 2.2 (2026)

Area of state; figures for official state publications.

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

STATE AREA


Act 78 of 1945


2.2 Area of state; figures for official state publications.

Sec. 2.

    All official publications of the state of Michigan issued after the passage of this act, in which the total area, total land area or total water area of Michigan are stated shall use the figures set forth in section 1.

History: 1945, Act 78, Eff. Sept. 6, 1945 ;-- CL 1948, 2.2

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 60 cases (14 in the last 5 years), 1958–2026 · leading case: Roselyn Ford v. Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 931 N.W.2d 571 (Mich. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Roselyn Ford v. Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 931 N.W.2d 571 (Mich. 2019). · cites it 26× “Section 2.2 of the Hegadorn Trust states that the “Trustee shall distribute the Resources of the Trust at a rate that is calculated to use up all of the Resources during” Mr.”
Paragon Props. Co. v. City of Novi, 550 N.W.2d 772 (Mich. 1996). · cites it 4× “" Novi City Charter, § 2.2. Relevant to this case is subsection 1, which confers on the city the power of [e]stablishing districts or zones within which use of land and structures, the height, the area, the size and location of buildings and required open spaces for light and…”
Square Lake Hills Condo. Ass'n v. Bloomfield Twp., 471 N.W.2d 321 (Mich. 1991). · cites it 4× “Section 2.2. This Ordinance shall not interfere with, abrogate, annul nor appeal any other law, ordinance, rule or regulation previously in effect, including any other ordinance regulating boat launching and/or usage.”
Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Campbell-Durocher Grp. Painting & Gen. Contracting, LLC, 911 N.W.2d 493 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “The Campbells also alleged that the City breached § 2.2 of the contract by failing to give 90 days' written notice prior to termination.”
Lefkowitz v. Michigan Trucking, LLC (In Re Gainey Corp.), 447 B.R. 807 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 2011). · cites it 4× “Plan, § 2.2; Base Case Dkt. No. 1506. Also, the money received by the Liquidation Trust would be úsed to pay in full “liabilities incurred in the ordinary course of business by the Debtors post-petition as of the [effective date of confirmation].”
In re Shefa, LLC, 524 B.R. 717 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2015). · cites it 4× “” Section 2.2 of the Letter of Intent provides that KFG and the Debtor will enter into “good faith negotiations with the view to agree, on or before January 31, 2015,” on a “definitive agreement.”
Alpha Capital Mgmt., Inc. v. Rentenbach, 792 N.W.2d 344 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010). “1 required an initial payment of $75,000 at the closing and § 2.2 mandated execution of a promissory note in the amount of $1,425,000, to be paid in 20 equal quarterly installments.”
Brucker v. McKinlay Transp., Inc., 571 N.W.2d 548 (Mich. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 4× “Section 2.2 of the agreement and the following subsections are an attempt to reflect all liabilities and credits in arriving at the consolidated book value of the company.”
People v. Smith, 360 N.W.2d 841 (Mich. 1984). “See generally Hall, Search and Seizure, § 2.2; Edwards, Standing to Suppress Unreasonably Seized Evidence, 47 N W L Rev 471 (1952).”
Michigan Emp. Relations Comm'n v. Reeths-Puffer Sch. Dist., 215 N.W.2d 672 (Mich. 1974). · cites it 2× “[9] See Kahn, Labor Law: A Michigan Practitioner's Guide § 2.2, pp 100-101; Walsh, Michigan Labor-Management Relations Law Past and Present, 44 J Urban L 89, 93-94 (1966).”
Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. Chrysler Corp., 546 F. Supp. 54 (E.D. Mich. 1982). “Chrysler Pension Plan § 2.2. Former employees with at least 10 years of corporate service are entitled to a deferred pension which pays full benefits depending upon the years of corporate service, upon reaching age 65.”
People v. Holloway, 330 N.W.2d 405 (Mich. 1982). “Where, for example, the police see a crime being committed in a public place, there has been no intrusion into a constitutionally protected area. There is thus no reason to meet the requirements of the plain-view exception in support of a subsequent arrest.”
Show all 60 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 2.2(1) — 1 case
Paragon Props. Co. v. City of Novi, 550 N.W.2d 772 (Mich. 1996). “" Novi City Charter, § 2.2. Relevant to this case is subsection 1, which confers on the city the power of [e]stablishing districts or zones within which use of land and structures, the height, the area, the size and location of buildings and required open spaces for light and…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 2.2(63) — 1 case
Charter Twp. of White Lake v. Ciurlik Enter. (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 2.2(8)(1) — 1 case
Nelson v. Goddard, 204 N.W.2d 739 (Mich. Ct. App. 1972).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 2.2(D) — 1 case
Nelson v. Goddard, 204 N.W.2d 739 (Mich. Ct. App. 1972).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 2.2(a) — 1 case
People v. Holloway, 330 N.W.2d 405 (Mich. 1982). “Where, for example, the police see a crime being committed in a public place, there has been no intrusion into a constitutionally protected area. There is thus no reason to meet the requirements of the plain-view exception in support of a subsequent arrest.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 2.2(b) — 1 case
Automation Controls & Eng'g, LLC v. Felsomat USA, Inc. (E.D. Mich. 2020).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 2.2(c) — 1 case
Afjn Holdings LLC v. City of Highland Park (Mich. Ct. App. 2026).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 2.2(d) — 1 case
Romanian Orthodox Episcopate v. Holy Ascension Orthodox Christian (Mich. Ct. App. 2019).
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.