Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 280.2 (2026)

Drains; location, establishment, construction, maintenance, and improvements; petition.

✓ current as of July 2026

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

THE DRAIN CODE OF 1956

Act 40 of 1956

280.2 Drains; location, establishment, construction, maintenance, and improvements; petition.

Sec. 2.

Drains including branches may be located, established, constructed and maintained, and existing drains, creeks, rivers and watercourses and their branches, or tributaries whether located, established and constructed by a county drain commissioner or drainage board or by a city, village or township, may be cleaned out, straightened, widened, deepened, extended, consolidated, relocated, tiled, connected and relocated along a highway, or there may be provided for the same structures or mechanical devices that will properly purify or improve the flow of the drain or pumping equipment necessary to assist or relieve the flow of the drain, or 1 or more branches may be added thereto, by petition under the provisions of this act, whenever the same shall be conducive to the public health, convenience and welfare.

History: 1956, Act 40, Imd. Eff. Mar. 28, 1956 ;-- Am. 1956, Ex. Sess., Act 5, Imd. Eff. June 23, 1956 ;-- Am. 1965, Act 194, Imd. Eff. July 15, 1965 ;-- Am. 1969, Act 90, Imd. Eff. July 24, 1969 ;-- Am. 1971, Act 60, Imd. Eff. July 20, 1971

PopularName Notes:

Act 40

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1969–2015 · leading case: Saginaw Cnty. v. John Sexton Corp., 591 N.W.2d 52 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Saginaw Cnty. v. John Sexton Corp., 591 N.W.2d 52 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 4× “Subsection 280.2 mandated that all surcharge payments be paid *206 quarterly to the county treasurer, but failed to identify the intended payor.”

Battjes Builders v. Kent Cnty. Drain Comm'r, 167 N.W.2d 123 (Mich. Ct. App. 1969). · cites it 4× “, would be the only party to benefit from the building of the proposed drain and *621 thus that it would be private construction not conducive to the public health, -welfare and convenience required by the drain code of 1956 as amended; MCLA § 280.2 et seq. (Stat Ann 1968 Rev §…”

Ross v. Consumers Power Co., 327 N.W.2d 293 (Mich. 1982). “MCL 280.2; MSA 11.1002. Plainly, that is a mandate intended to serve the common good of all.”

Ray v. Mason Cnty. Drain Comm'r, 210 N.W.2d 810 (Mich. Ct. App. 1973). · cites it 2× “Plaintiffs claim that the board of determination of necessity failed to consider the cost of the project to the people in the watershed, contrary to MCLA 280.2; MSA 11.1002, and MCLA 280.72; MSA 11.”

Est. of James Dudley v. St Clair Co Off. of Drain Comm'r (Mich. Ct. App. 2015). “33, specifically MCL 280.2. See also MCL 280.10 and MCL 280.”

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.