Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 257.651 (2026)

State trunk line highways; preference at intersections; stop, yield or merge signs.

✓ current as of July 2026

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

MICHIGAN VEHICLE CODE

Act 300 of 1949

257.651 State trunk line highways; preference at intersections; stop, yield or merge signs.

Sec. 651.

(a) Except where approved traffic signals are used to control traffic, the state highway commissioner shall erect stop, yield or merge signs at every entrance to a state trunk line highway from intersecting highways or streets. However, after a traffic engineering investigation the state highway commission acting jointly with the commissioner of the Michigan state police may give preference to a city street or a county road over a state trunk line highway, and shall erect appropriate signs.

(b) Where 2 or more state trunk line highways intersect or cross, the state highway commissioner and the commissioner of the Michigan state police, acting jointly, shall determine which traffic, if any, shall be given preference and appropriate stop, yield or merge signs shall be erected.

History: 1949, Act 300, Eff. Sept. 23, 1949 ;-- Am. 1959, Act 151, Imd. Eff. July 16, 1959 ;-- Am. 1966, Act 237, Eff. Mar. 10, 1967

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1953–1972 · leading case: Noyce v. Ross, 104 N.W.2d 736 (Mich. 1960).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Noyce v. Ross, 104 N.W.2d 736 (Mich. 1960). “CLS 1956, § 257.651 (Stat Ann 1952 Rev § 9.2351). He had a duty, likewise, to yield the right-of-way to traffic lawfully approaching on the favored highway.”

Sabo v. Beatty, 197 N.W.2d 871 (Mich. Ct. App. 1972). “” MCLA 257.651; MSA 9.2351, as amended by 1959 PA 151 , § 651, provides in relevant part: “Sec.”

Erdei v. Beverage Distrib. Co., 202 N.W.2d 434 (Mich. Ct. App. 1972). “While ordinarily the questions of negligence and contributory negligence are for the trier of fact to decide, the preliminary question of whether there is sufficient evidence from which jurors may reasonably infer negligence or contributory negligence is a question of law for…”

Sivak v. Swan Ice Cream Co., 56 N.W.2d 273 (Mich. 1953). “* But see PÁ 1949, No 300, § 651 (CL 1948, § 257.651 [Stat Ann 1952 Rev § 9.2351]). .”

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.