Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 26 / Act 190 of 1909
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 26.51 (2026)

Compiled Laws of 1897, subsequent legislation, and all Michigan reports; distribution to county clerks by state librarian.

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Aug. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

FURNISHING CERTAIN COUNTIES WITH LAWS AND REPORTS


Act 190 of 1909


26.51 Compiled Laws of 1897, subsequent legislation, and all Michigan reports; distribution to county clerks by state librarian.

Sec. 1.

    In all counties in which circuit court is held in more than 1 place, it shall be the duty of the secretary of state to furnish to the county clerk of such county, for the use of said circuit court, 1 complete set of the Compiled Laws of 1897, together with the index thereof and acts passed by the legislature subsequent to 1897, and the state librarian shall furnish 1 complete set of the Michigan supreme court reports: Provided, That if for any reason the state librarian shall be unable to furnish any of the volumes of said reports, the board of state auditors is hereby authorized, and it is its duty, to purchase such missing volumes to complete such set: Provided further, It shall be the duty of the state librarian to furnish from time to time to said county clerk, the current volumes of Michigan supreme court reports as they are issued.

History: 1909, Act 190, Eff. Sept. 1, 1909 ;-- CL 1915, 875 ;-- CL 1929, 544 ;-- CL 1948, 26.51

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1939–1963 · leading case: Judd v. Carnegie, 37 N.W.2d 558 (Mich. 1949).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Judd v. Carnegie, 37 N.W.2d 558 (Mich. 1949). “§ 26.51 et seq.]), defendant may not claim a resulting trust in his favor.”
Wilson v. Potter, 63 N.W.2d 413 (Mich. 1954). “In determining the intention of the parties at the time of the execution of the deed by plaintiff in 1948, we must necessarily be guided by what was^ said and done tending to throw light on the matter,, including of course the written instrument itself.”
Hacker v. Hacker, 283 N.W. 639 (Mich. 1939). “” We will not extend this opinion by the recital of other evidence, clearly showing that plaintiff deeded property to defendants and vested title thereto in fee simple.”
Saur v. Rexford, 119 N.W.2d 669 (Mich. 1963). · cites it 2× “They are such tenants since neither the deed of 1930 nor any other instrument or agreement, oral or written, is shown as having imposed any duties upon the "trustee" grantees.”
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.