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

Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.16105 (2026)

Definitions; H.

✓ 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


333.16105 Definitions; H.

Sec. 16105.

    (1) "Health occupation" means a health related vocation, calling, occupation, or employment performed by an individual whether or not the individual is licensed or registered under this article.

    (2) "Health profession" means a vocation, calling, occupation, or employment performed by an individual acting pursuant to a license or registration issued under this article.

    (3) "Health profession specialty field" means an area of practice established under this article that is within the scope of activities, functions, and duties of a licensed health profession and that requires advanced education and training beyond that required for initial licensure.

    (4) "Health profession specialty field license" means an authorization to use a title issued to a licensee who has met qualifications established by the Michigan board of dentistry for registration in a health profession specialty field. An individual who holds a dental specialty certification on the effective date of the amendatory act that added this subsection is considered to hold a health profession specialty field license in that speciality and may obtain renewal of the health profession specialty field license in that speciality on the expiration date of the specialty certification. The health profession specialty field license is not a license as that term is defined in section 16106(2).

    (5) "Health profession subfield" means an area of practice established under this article which is within the scope of the activities, functions, and duties of a licensed health profession, and requires less comprehensive knowledge and skill than is required to practice the full scope of the health profession.

History: 1978, Act 368, Eff. Sept. 30, 1978 ;-- Am. 2002, Act 643, Imd. Eff. Dec. 23, 2002

PopularName Notes:

Act 368
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases, 1986–2020 · leading case: Cox v. Eric J. Hartman, M.D., & Blue Water Obstetrics & Gynecology Prof'l Corp., 911 N.W.2d 219 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Cox v. Eric J. Hartman, M.D., & Blue Water Obstetrics & Gynecology Prof'l Corp., 911 N.W.2d 219 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 3× “Our Supreme Court has looked to the definition of "health profession" contained in MCL 333.16105(2), a provision of the Public Health Code (PHC), MCL 333.”
Potter v. McLeary, 774 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 2009). · cites it 4× “[9] MCL 333.16105(2) (emphasis added). [10] MCL 333.”
People v. Rogers, 641 N.W.2d 595 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “” MCL 333.16105(1). 6 MCL 333.16171 provides: Under the circumstances and subject to the limitations stated in each case, the following individuals are not required to have a license issued under this article for practice of a health profession in this state: (a) A student in a…”
Bates v. Gilbert, 479 Mich. 451 (Mich. 2007). · cites it 2× “” MCL 333.16105(2). Optometry and ophthalmology are two differently regulated and licensed health professions, which address different problems.”
Brown v. Hayes, 716 N.W.2d 13 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 4× “" MCL 333.16105. Contrary to our dissenting colleague's reasoning, there is no requirement that an activity be licensed or registered to constitute a "health profession," as long as the individuals engaged in the activity are licensed or registered.”
Jones v. Botsford Continuing Care Corp., 871 N.W.2d 15 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015). “” MCL 333.16105(3). The dissent suggests that Dr.”
Natsch v. City of Southfield, 397 N.W.2d 294 (Mich. Ct. App. 1986). “[MCL 333.16105; MSA 14.15(16105).] Emergency medical technicians are not licensed under Article 15.”
Angelina a Cox v. Eric J Hartman Md (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 3× “Our Supreme Court has looked to the definition of “health profession” contained in MCL 333.16105(2), a provision of the Public Health Code (PHC), when interpreting MCL 600.”
Eva Lafave v. All. Healthcare Servs. Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 3× “Defendant further argues that, by virtue of the ARRT certification, Perry works in a “health profession” under MCL 333.16105(2). Once again, however, resort to the statutory definition belies defendant’s claim.”
Kelley Crego v. Edward W Sparrow Hosp. Assn (Mich. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “at 501 , quoting MCL 333.16105 (quotation marks omitted). Given this broad definition, the Brown Court opined that, despite the disparity between the license required of a physical therapist under part 178 of the Public Health Code and the registration required of an…”
Brian Potter v. Richard C McLeary Md (Mich. 2009). · cites it 2× “9 MCL 333.16105(2) (emphasis added). 10 MCL 333.”
Est. of Michael Saldana v. Nathan Lee Smith (Mich. Ct. App. 2016). “20106(1), and that Smith was not practicing or holding himself out as practicing a “vocation, calling, occupation, or employment” that required him to be licensed or registered under Article 15 of the occupational code, see MCL 333.16105(2). Accordingly, Smith is not among the…”
Show all 16 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.16105(1) — 1 case
People v. Rogers, 641 N.W.2d 595 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002). “” MCL 333.16105(1). 6 MCL 333.16171 provides: Under the circumstances and subject to the limitations stated in each case, the following individuals are not required to have a license issued under this article for practice of a health profession in this state: (a) A student in a…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.16105(2) — 12 cases
Potter v. McLeary, 774 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 2009). “[9] MCL 333.16105(2) (emphasis added). [10] MCL 333.”
Cox v. Eric J. Hartman, M.D., & Blue Water Obstetrics & Gynecology Prof'l Corp., 911 N.W.2d 219 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “Our Supreme Court has looked to the definition of "health profession" contained in MCL 333.16105(2), a provision of the Public Health Code (PHC), MCL 333.”
Bates v. Gilbert, 479 Mich. 451 (Mich. 2007). “” MCL 333.16105(2). Optometry and ophthalmology are two differently regulated and licensed health professions, which address different problems.”
People v. Rogers, 641 N.W.2d 595 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002). “” MCL 333.16105(1). 6 MCL 333.16171 provides: Under the circumstances and subject to the limitations stated in each case, the following individuals are not required to have a license issued under this article for practice of a health profession in this state: (a) A student in a…”
Angelina a Cox v. Eric J Hartman Md (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “Our Supreme Court has looked to the definition of “health profession” contained in MCL 333.16105(2), a provision of the Public Health Code (PHC), when interpreting MCL 600.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.16105(3) — 5 cases
Cox v. Eric J. Hartman, M.D., & Blue Water Obstetrics & Gynecology Prof'l Corp., 911 N.W.2d 219 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “Our Supreme Court has looked to the definition of "health profession" contained in MCL 333.16105(2), a provision of the Public Health Code (PHC), MCL 333.”
Jones v. Botsford Continuing Care Corp., 871 N.W.2d 15 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015). “” MCL 333.16105(3). The dissent suggests that Dr.”
Angelina a Cox v. Eric J Hartman Md (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “Our Supreme Court has looked to the definition of “health profession” contained in MCL 333.16105(2), a provision of the Public Health Code (PHC), when interpreting MCL 600.”
Eva Lafave v. All. Healthcare Servs. Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2020). “Defendant further argues that, by virtue of the ARRT certification, Perry works in a “health profession” under MCL 333.16105(2). Once again, however, resort to the statutory definition belies defendant’s claim.”
Est. of Amos Jones v. Botsford Continuing Care Corp. (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
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.