Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 213 / Act 87 of 1980
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 213.52 (2026)

Standards provided; limitations; applicable laws and court rules; commencement of condemnation action; proof of taking of property; certificate of public necessity as condition of instituting judicial proceedings.

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

THE UNIFORM CONDEMNATION PROCEDURES ACT


Act 87 of 1980


213.52 Standards provided; limitations; applicable laws and court rules; commencement of condemnation action; proof of taking of property; certificate of public necessity as condition of instituting judicial proceedings.

Sec. 2.

    (1) This act provides standards for the acquisition of property by an agency, the conduct of condemnation actions, and the determination of just compensation. It does not confer the power of eminent domain, and does not prescribe or restrict the purposes for which or the persons by whom that power may be exercised. All laws and court rules applicable to civil actions shall apply to condemnation proceedings except as otherwise provided in this act.

    (2) If property is to be acquired by an agency through the exercise of its power of eminent domain, the agency shall commence a condemnation action for that purpose. An agency shall not intentionally make it necessary for an owner of property to commence an action, including an action for constructive taking or de facto taking, to prove the fact of the taking of the property.

    (3) If a private agency is required by law to secure a certificate of public necessity from the public service commission or other public agency before it may acquire property, the private agency shall not institute judicial proceedings to acquire the property until it has secured the required certificate.

History: 1980, Act 87, Imd. Eff. Apr. 8, 1980

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: City of Kalamazoo v. Kts Indus., Inc, 687 N.W.2d 319 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Kalamazoo v. Kts Indus., Inc, 687 N.W.2d 319 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “” MCL 213.52(1). Thus, the UCPA is merely a procedural statute, Edward Rose Realty, supra at 632; Novi v Robert Adell Children’s Funded Trust, 253 Mich App 330, 336 ; 659 NW2d 615 (2002), and “in order to employ the procedures of the UCPA, a city must be authorized to exercise…”
Detroit Edison Co. v. Armada Twp., 357 N.W.2d 843 (Mich. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 9× “In this appeal involving the acquisition of land for the purpose of constructing a 22-mile-long high energy transmission line, we are asked to decide a question of first impression: Does §2 of the Uniform Condemnation Procedures Act (UCPA), MCL 213.52; MSA 8.265(2), require that…”
City of Lansing v. Edward Rose Realty, Inc., 502 N.W.2d 638 (Mich. 1993). · cites it 2× “" MCL 213.52(1); MSA 8.265(2)(1). Hence in order to employ the procedures of the UCPA, a city must be authorized to exercise its power of eminent domain by a statutory or constitutional delegation of such power.”
Detroit/Wayne Cnty. Stadium Auth. v. Drinkwater, Taylor & Merrill, Inc., 705 N.W.2d 549 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005). “MCL 213.52 of the Uniform Condemnation Procedures Act, MCL 213.”
Wayne Cnty. v. Britton Trust, 563 N.W.2d 674 (Mich. 1997). “” MCL 213.52(1); MSA 8.265(2)(1). Although § 5 of the ucpa mandates the condemning agency to make the property owner a good-faith offer of just compensation, see MCL 213.”
Dep't of Transp. v. Dyl, 441 N.W.2d 18 (Mich. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “Plaintiff notes that MCL 213.52(1); MSA 8.265(2)(1) provides in part: All laws and court rules applicable to civil actions shall apply to condemnation proceedings except as otherwise provided in this act.”
City of Flint v. Patel, 497 N.W.2d 542 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993). “8 MCL 213.52(1); MSA 8.265(2)(1). 9 MCL 213.”
City of Detroit v. J Cusmano & Son, Inc, 459 N.W.2d 3 (Mich. Ct. App. 1989). “Bay City v Surath, 170 Mich App 139, 142 ; 428 NW2d 9 (1988), lv den 431 Mich 901 (1988); MCL 213.52; MSA 8.265(2). The Legislature’s intent is to place a property owner in as good a position as was occupied before the taking.”
City of Bay City v. Surath, 428 N.W.2d 9 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “MCL 213.52; MSA 8.265(2). If property is to be acquired by a governmental agency through the exercise of its power of eminent domain, the agency shall commence a condemnation action by filing a complaint for the acquisition of the property in the circuit court in the county in…”
Dep't of Transp. v. Gilling, 289 Mich. App. 219 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010). “52(1), protects the state from property owners seeking duplicative payments for moving and relocation expenses: “A person is not entitled to a payment in connection with the acquisition of all or part of that person’s property under this act if that payment would be duplicative…”
In Re Condemnation of Land, 536 N.W.2d 598 (Mich. Ct. App. 1995). “MCL 213.52(1); MSA 8.265(2)(1). Section 5 of the UCPA provides that a condemning agency must make a property owner a good-faith offer of just compensation for the property.”
Novi v. Robert Adell Child.’s Funded Trust, 659 N.W.2d 615 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003). “14 MCL 213.52(1); Lansing v Edward Rose Realty, Inc, 442 Mich 626, 632 ; 502 NW2d 638 (1993).”
Show all 24 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 213.52(1) — 11 cases
City of Kalamazoo v. Kts Indus., Inc, 687 N.W.2d 319 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). “” MCL 213.52(1). Thus, the UCPA is merely a procedural statute, Edward Rose Realty, supra at 632; Novi v Robert Adell Children’s Funded Trust, 253 Mich App 330, 336 ; 659 NW2d 615 (2002), and “in order to employ the procedures of the UCPA, a city must be authorized to exercise…”
City of Lansing v. Edward Rose Realty, Inc., 502 N.W.2d 638 (Mich. 1993). “" MCL 213.52(1); MSA 8.265(2)(1). Hence in order to employ the procedures of the UCPA, a city must be authorized to exercise its power of eminent domain by a statutory or constitutional delegation of such power.”
Wayne Cnty. v. Britton Trust, 563 N.W.2d 674 (Mich. 1997). “” MCL 213.52(1); MSA 8.265(2)(1). Although § 5 of the ucpa mandates the condemning agency to make the property owner a good-faith offer of just compensation, see MCL 213.”
Dep't of Transp. v. Dyl, 441 N.W.2d 18 (Mich. Ct. App. 1989). “Plaintiff notes that MCL 213.52(1); MSA 8.265(2)(1) provides in part: All laws and court rules applicable to civil actions shall apply to condemnation proceedings except as otherwise provided in this act.”
City of Flint v. Patel, 497 N.W.2d 542 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993). “8 MCL 213.52(1); MSA 8.265(2)(1). 9 MCL 213.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 213.52(2) — 5 cases
Dep't of Transp. v. Kochville Twp., 682 N.W.2d 553 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
Moore v. City of Detroit, 382 N.W.2d 482 (Mich. Ct. App. 1985).
Thomas James Kowalchuk v. City of Jackson (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
Thomas James Kowalchuk v. City of Jackson (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
20221117_C358755_27_358755.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 213.52(3) — 1 case
Detroit Edison Co. v. Armada Twp., 357 N.W.2d 843 (Mich. Ct. App. 1984). “In this appeal involving the acquisition of land for the purpose of constructing a 22-mile-long high energy transmission line, we are asked to decide a question of first impression: Does §2 of the Uniform Condemnation Procedures Act (UCPA), MCL 213.52; MSA 8.265(2), require that…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 213.52(g) — 1 case
Detroit Edison Co. v. Armada Twp., 357 N.W.2d 843 (Mich. Ct. App. 1984). “In this appeal involving the acquisition of land for the purpose of constructing a 22-mile-long high energy transmission line, we are asked to decide a question of first impression: Does §2 of the Uniform Condemnation Procedures Act (UCPA), MCL 213.52; MSA 8.265(2), require that…”
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.