Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 319.104 (2026)

Fiduciaries; right to prosecute and defend suits; parties.

✓ current as of July 2026

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

OIL AND GAS MINING

Act 178 of 1941

319.104 Fiduciaries; right to prosecute and defend suits; parties.

Sec. 4.

Executors, administrators and administrators with will annexed, receivers and trustees, may institute or defend such suits on behalf of their respective estates and trusts and the heirs, devisees, legatees, successors and assigns thereof. Infants and persons under legal disability may institute or defend suits by guardian or next of friend. Every person, including wives of owners, having any interest in such lands, whether in possession or otherwise, who is not a party plaintiff, shall be made a party defendant to such suit. In case of persons interested in such lands whose names are unknown, the bill of complaint shall so state, and such persons may be made parties to such suits by the name and description of "unknown owners."

History: 1941, Act 178, Eff. Jan. 10, 1942 ;-- CL 1948, 319.104

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 2004–2004 · leading case: Mable Cleary Trust v. Edward-Marlah Muzyl Trust, 686 N.W.2d 770 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Mable Cleary Trust v. Edward-Marlah Muzyl Trust, 686 N.W.2d 770 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). “” Had plaintiff desired to use the majority in interest statute to prevent development of Otsego’s interest, plaintiff was free to institute an action pursuant to MCL 319.104, yet it did not do so. In any event, such an action would have been futile because MCL 319.”

Mable Cleary Trust v. Edward-Marlah Muzyl Trust, 686 N.W.2d 770 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). “" Had plaintiff desired to use the majority in interest statute to prevent development of Otsego's interest, plaintiff was free to institute an action pursuant to MCL 319.104, yet it did not do so. In any event, such an action would have been futile because MCL 319.”

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.