Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 247 / Act 200 of 1969

Mich. Comp. Laws § 247.321

Driveways, banners and parades on highways; definitions.

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

DRIVEWAYS, BANNERS, AND PARADES


Act 200 of 1969


247.321 Driveways, banners and parades on highways; definitions.

Sec. 1.

    As used in this act:

    (a) "Driveway" means a driveway, lane, road or any other way providing vehicular access to or from the highway from or to property adjoining the highway but does not mean a city or village street or other highway covered by the provisions of Act No. 288 of the Public Acts of 1967, being sections 560.101 to 560.293 of the Compiled Laws of 1948.

    (b) "Highway" means a state trunk line highway or a county road including the entire right of way.

    (c) "Highway authority" means the department of state highways in the case of state trunk line highways, and the board of county road commissioners in the case of county roads.

History: 1969, Act 200, Imd. Eff. Aug. 6, 1969

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1978–2025 · leading case: Greenfield Construction Co. v. Department of State Highways
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Greenfield Construction Co. v. Department of State Highways (1978) mich · cites it 2× “, prescribing, pursuant to 1969 PA 200 ; MCLA 247.321; MSA 9.140(21), the composition and manner of constructing private driveways intersecting with highways.”
Smith v. Edwards (2002) michctapp · cites it 4× “Plaintiffs contended, among other arguments, that the motion should be denied because the permit that the LCRC issued was *204 invalid for the reason that the lcrc’s reliance on the driveway act, MCL 247.321 et seq., as authority to issue the permit was improper.”
Carney v. Department of Transportation (1985) michctapp “The state lacked authority to close the driveway completely with a guardrail.”
Listanski v. Canton Charter Township (1994) michctapp · cites it 2× “[6] In fact, in the driveway example supra, if permission were a pivotal factor in defining jurisdiction, the county and the state would have jurisdiction over the driveway because MCL 247.321; MSA 9.140(21) requires permission of the county for installation of driveways.”
Loyer Educational Trust v. Wayne County Road Commission (1988) michctapp “Defendants based their modification requirement upon a set of rules entitled Rules, Standards and Procedures for Driveways within Wayne County Road Commission Right of Way, which was promulgated pursuant to the Michigan driveways, banners, events and parades act, MCL 247.321 et…”
Engineered Housing Concepts, Inc v. Wayne County (1989) michctapp “MCL 247.321 et seq.; MSA 9.140(21) et seq.”
Brad Lee Tubbs v. Lapeer County Road Commission (2017) michctapp “” Reasonable minds could not differ regarding whether the driveway existed in 1969. The strongest evidence plaintiff provided was the aerial photograph from 1964, which shows a line running east to west off Hasler Lake Road, just north of a y-shaped driveway that serviced an old…”
Brad Lee Tubbs v. Lapeer County Road Commission (2017) michctapp “” Reasonable minds could not differ regarding whether the driveway existed in 1969. The strongest evidence plaintiff provided was the aerial photograph from 1964, which shows a line running east to west off Hasler Lake Road, just north of a y-shaped driveway that serviced an old…”
West Lansing Retail Development LLC v. His Acres LLC (2023) michctapp “” The driveways, banners, and parades act, MCL 247.321 et seq., “prescribe[s] requirements for the issuance of permits.”
Robert Kanas v. Duane Travis (2025) michctapp “Thus, this issue is governed by the driveways, banners, and parades act (the driveway act), MCL 247.321 et seq., which allows municipalities to grant driveway permits and emphasizes the right to reasonable access to the highway.”
Scholma v. Ottawa County Road Commission (2013) michctapp “They requested declaratory relief for violations of the driveways, banners, events, and parades act (the Driveway Act), MCL 247.321 et seq., and the Michigan Right to Farm Act (RTFA), MCL 286.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 247.321(a) — 1 case
Smith v. Edwards (2002) michctapp “Plaintiffs contended, among other arguments, that the motion should be denied because the permit that the LCRC issued was *204 invalid for the reason that the lcrc’s reliance on the driveway act, MCL 247.321 et seq., as authority to issue the permit was improper.”
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.