Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 333 / Act 368 of 1978
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.1205 (2026)

Contested case hearing; appeal.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

PUBLIC HEALTH CODE


Act 368 of 1978


333.1205 Contested case hearing; appeal.

Sec. 1205.

    (1)  An applicant, licensee, or other person whose legal rights, duties, or privileges are required by this code to be determined by the department, after an opportunity for a hearing, has the right to a contested case hearing in the matter, which shall be conducted pursuant to the administrative procedures act of 1969 and authorized rules governing the hearing.

    (2) The decision, finding, or order of the department entered after the hearing may be appealed as provided by the administrative procedures act of 1969, except where otherwise provided by this code.

History: 1978, Act 368, Eff. Sept. 30, 1978

PopularName Notes:

Act 368
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1990–2021 · leading case: Gentry v. Dep't of Pub. Health, 451 N.W.2d 878 (Mich. Ct. App. 1990).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Gentry v. Dep't of Pub. Health, 451 N.W.2d 878 (Mich. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “MCL 333.1205; MSA 14.15(1205) provides: (1) An applicant, licensee, or other person whose legal rights, duties, or privileges are required by this code to be determined by the department, after an opportunity for a hearing, has the right to a contested case hearing in the…”
Hicks v. Dep't of Com., 560 N.W.2d 54 (Mich. Ct. App. 1996). “Pursuant to § 1205 of the Public Health Code, MCL 333.1205; MSA 14.15(1205), respondent was required to give petitioner a contested case hearing conducted pursuant to the APA and any authorized rules governing such hearings.”
Lakeshore Grp. v. Dep't of Env't Quality (Mich. 2021). “Moreover, by removing discretion from EGLE to grant a formal hearing, the majority simultaneously creates a problematic statutory regime that, in its words, “provides 26 MCL 333.1205(1) (emphasis added). 27 MCL 330.”
Lakeshore Grp. v. Dep't of Env't Quality (Mich. 2021). “Moreover, by removing discretion from EGLE to grant a formal hearing, the majority simultaneously creates a problematic statutory regime that, in its words, “provides 26 MCL 333.1205(1) (emphasis added). 27 MCL 330.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.1205(1) — 2 cases
Lakeshore Grp. v. Dep't of Env't Quality (Mich. 2021). “Moreover, by removing discretion from EGLE to grant a formal hearing, the majority simultaneously creates a problematic statutory regime that, in its words, “provides 26 MCL 333.1205(1) (emphasis added). 27 MCL 330.”
Lakeshore Grp. v. Dep't of Env't Quality (Mich. 2021). “Moreover, by removing discretion from EGLE to grant a formal hearing, the majority simultaneously creates a problematic statutory regime that, in its words, “provides 26 MCL 333.1205(1) (emphasis added). 27 MCL 330.”
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.