Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.2624 (2026)

Grants and contracts to conduct or support research activities and scientific evaluations.

✓ 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


333.2624 Grants and contracts to conduct or support research activities and scientific evaluations.

Sec. 2624.

    The department may make grants to and contracts with persons and governmental entities to conduct or support research activities and scientific evaluations authorized under sections 2621 and 2623.

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

PopularName Notes:

Act 368
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2014–2015 · leading case: People v. Mazur, 872 N.W.2d 201 (Mich. 2015).
People v. Mazur, 872 N.W.2d 201 (Mich. 2015). · cites it 2× “I agree with Part IV(A) of the majority opinion, which concludes that defendant is not entitled to immunity under § 4(i) of the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (MMMA), MCL 333.2624(f). I write separately because I respectfully disagree with the conclusion reached in Part IV(B) of…”
People v. Butler-Jackson, 862 N.W.2d 423 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “Plaintiff argued in the trial court, and the trial court agreed, that “[t]he logical corollary to [MCL 333.2624(f)] is that if the physician does not comport with the statute, she is subject to prosecution.”
People of Michigan v. Lois Butler-Jackson (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “In fact, they may have done the opposite and conspired to commit illegal acts, in part through the use of MCL 333.2624(f). The defendant was convicted of violating MCL 750.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.2624(f) — 3 cases
People v. Mazur, 872 N.W.2d 201 (Mich. 2015). “I agree with Part IV(A) of the majority opinion, which concludes that defendant is not entitled to immunity under § 4(i) of the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (MMMA), MCL 333.2624(f). I write separately because I respectfully disagree with the conclusion reached in Part IV(B) of…”
People v. Butler-Jackson, 862 N.W.2d 423 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “Plaintiff argued in the trial court, and the trial court agreed, that “[t]he logical corollary to [MCL 333.2624(f)] is that if the physician does not comport with the statute, she is subject to prosecution.”
People of Michigan v. Lois Butler-Jackson (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “In fact, they may have done the opposite and conspired to commit illegal acts, in part through the use of MCL 333.2624(f). The defendant was convicted of violating MCL 750.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.2624(i) — 1 case
People v. Mazur, 872 N.W.2d 201 (Mich. 2015). “I agree with Part IV(A) of the majority opinion, which concludes that defendant is not entitled to immunity under § 4(i) of the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (MMMA), MCL 333.2624(f). I write separately because I respectfully disagree with the conclusion reached in Part IV(B) of…”
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.