Mich. Comp. Laws § 24.271

Parties in contested case; time and notice of hearing; service of notice or other process on legislator.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT OF 1969

Act 306 of 1969

24.271 Parties in contested case; time and notice of hearing; service of notice or other process on legislator.

Sec. 71.

(1) The parties in a contested case shall be given an opportunity for a hearing without undue delay.

(2) The parties shall be given a reasonable notice of the hearing, which notice shall include:

(a) A statement of the date, hour, place, and nature of the hearing. Unless otherwise specified in the notice the hearing shall be held at the principal office of the agency.

(b) A statement of the legal authority and jurisdiction under which the hearing is to be held.

(d) A short and plain statement of the matters asserted. If the agency or other party is unable to state the matters in detail at the time the notice is given, the initial notice may state the issues involved. Thereafter on application the agency or other party shall furnish a more definite and detailed statement on the issues.

(3) A member of the legislature shall not be privileged from service of notice or other process pursuant to this chapter except on a day on which there is a scheduled meeting of the house of which he or she is a member. However, a member of the legislature shall not be privileged from service of notice or other process pursuant to this chapter on a day on which there is a scheduled meeting of the house of which he or she is a member, if such service of notice or process is executed by certified mail, return receipt requested.

History: 1969, Act 306, Eff. July 1, 1970 ;-- Am. 1984, Act 28, Imd. Eff. Mar. 12, 1984

Constitutionality Notes:

Administrative hearings under the Administrative Procedures Act, however informal, comport with the procedural fairness required by due process in the absence of an explicit statutory requirement that a contested evidentiary hearing be held. Convalescent Center v Blue Cross, 414 Mich 247; 324 NW2d 851 (1982).

PopularName Notes:

Act 306

PopularName Notes:

APA

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 65 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1938–2025 · leading case: Ford Motor Co. v. Bruce Township

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Ford Motor Co. v. Bruce Township (2004) michctapp · cites it 4× “The tribunal's rules state that when an applicable tribunal rule does not exist, the Michigan Rules of Court and MCL 24.271 to MCL 24.287 shall govern 1999 A.”

President Inn Properties, LLC v. City of Grand Rapids (2011) michctapp “” Furthermore, except for proceedings in the residential property and small claims division of the tribunal, tribunal hearings “shall be conducted pursuant to chapter 4 of the administrative procedures act of 1969, 1969 PA 306 , MCL 24.271 to 24.287 .. . .” MCL 205.726.”

In re Parole of Elias (2011) michctapp “” MCL 24.271. A “contested case” is defined as “a proceeding.”

Lawrence v. Department of Corrections (1979) michctapp · cites it 2× “Presented for our determination here is the question whether a prison misconduct hearing is a "contested case” as that term is defined in § 3 (3) of the act, MCL 24.”

Great Lakes Div. v. City of Ecorse (1998) michctapp “§ 24.271 et seq.; M.S.A. § 3.560(171) et seq.”

Great Lakes Division of National Steel Corp. v. City of Ecorse (1998) michctapp “] MCL 24.271 et seq.; MSA 3.560(171) et seq.”

Penn v. Department of Corrections (1980) michctapp · cites it 2× “" Chapter 4, MCL 24.271; MSA 3.560(171) through MCL 24.”

South Dearborn Environmental Improvement Ass'n v. Department of Environmental Quality (2016) michctapp “, Chapter 4 of the APA, MCL 24.271 et seq., apply. And because these provisions applied, that means that the APA applied to the decision to grant PTI 182-05C.”

Michigan Ass'n of Home Builders v. Department of Labor & Economic Growth Director (2008) mich “See MCL 24.271 through 24.287. The public hearings specified in MCL 24.”

Traverse Oil Co. v. Chairman, Natural Resources Commission (1986) michctapp · cites it 2× “MCL 24.271; MSA 3.560(171) provides, in pertinent part: (1) The parties in a contested case shall be given an opportunity for a hearing without undue delay.”

Michigan State AFL-CIO v. Secretary of State (1998) michctapp · cites it 2× “§ 24.271; M.S.A. § 3.560(171), M.C.L. § 24.”

Rogers v. State Board of Cosmetology (1976) michctapp · cites it 2× “MCLA 24.271; MSA 3.560(171). A revocation would follow "contested case” procedures because a revocation is a "determination of legal rights, duties or privileges of a named party”, the definition of a "contested case” found in MCLA 24.”

Show all 65 citing cases →

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 24.271(1) — 4 cases

Ansell v. Department of Commerce (On Remand) (1997) michctapp

William R Henderson v. Civil Service Commission (2017) michctapp

Wronski v. Sun Oil Co. (1981) michctapp

William R Henderson v. Civil Service Commission (2017) michctapp

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 24.271(2)(d) — 3 cases

Traverse Oil Co. v. Chairman, Natural Resources Commission (1986) michctapp “MCL 24.271; MSA 3.560(171) provides, in pertinent part: (1) The parties in a contested case shall be given an opportunity for a hearing without undue delay.”

Michigan Intra-State Motor Tariff Bureau, Inc v. Public Service Commission (1993) michctapp

Department of Transportation v. Brown (1986) michctapp

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 24.271(3) — 1 case

Moch v. Nelsen (2000) michctapp

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.