OCCUPATIONAL CODE
Act 299 of 1980
339.2412 Action for collection of compensation for performance of act or contract; alleging and proving licensure; failure to use alternative dispute resolution; other legal action; civil violation.
Sec. 2412.
(1) A person or qualifying officer for a corporation or member of a residential builder or residential maintenance and alteration contractor shall not bring or maintain an action in a court of this state for the collection of compensation for the performance of an act or contract for which a license is required by this article without alleging and proving that the person was licensed under this article during the performance of the act or contract.
(2) Failure of the person bringing a complaint against a licensee to utilize a contractually provided alternative dispute resolution procedure shall be an affirmative defense to an action brought in a court of this state against a licensee under this article.
(3) A person or qualifying officer for a corporation or a member of a residential builder or residential maintenance and alteration contractor shall not impose or take any legal or other action to impose a lien on real property unless that person was licensed under this article during the performance of the act or contract.
(4) A prosecuting attorney and the attorney general may bring an action for a civil violation in a court of competent jurisdiction against a person not licensed under this article that has violated section 601(1) or (2). The court shall assess a civil fine, to be paid to the prosecuting attorney or the attorney general bringing the action, of not less than $5,000.00 and not more than $25,000.00, aside from any civil damages or restitution.
History: 1980, Act 299, Imd. Eff. Oct. 21, 1980 ;-- Am. 1980, Act 496, Eff. Mar. 31, 1981 ;-- Am. 2001, Act 113, Imd. Eff. July 31, 2001 ;-- Am. 2007, Act 155, Eff. June 1, 2008
PopularName Notes:
Act 299
Notes of Decisions
Epps v. 4 Quarters Restoration LLC, 872 N.W.2d 412 (Mich. 2015).
· cites it 51× “Furthermore, MCL 339.2412 expressly provides a mechanism for its enforcement, apart from civil liability: *535 A prosecuting attorney and the attorney general may bring an action for a civil violation in a court of competent jurisdiction against a person not licensed under this…”
Stokes v. Millen Roofing Co., 649 N.W.2d 371 (Mich. 2002).
· cites it 16× “§ 339.2412 barred Millen, an unlicensed contractor, from seeking compensation from plaintiffs under its contract with them for the installation of a slate roof.”
Edgewood Dev. Inc. v. Landskroener, 684 N.W.2d 387 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 7× “In Annex, which arose out of the trial court’s refusal to grant summary disposition based on MCL 339.2412, the factual predicate was as follows: There is no dispute that at the time plaintiff and defendants entered into the contract for the construction of defendants’ home…”
Stokes v. Millen Roofing Co., 627 N.W.2d 16 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 7× “The trial court dismissed defendant’s counterclaim and vacated the construction lien on the basis that defendant, as an unlicensed residential builder, was prohibited by MCL 339.2412 from recovering compensation for the work performed.”
EDGEWOOD DEV. INC. v. Landskroener, 684 N.W.2d 387 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 7× “In Annex, which arose out of the trial court's refusal to grant summary disposition based on MCL 339.2412, the factual predicate was as follows: There is no dispute that at the time plaintiff and defendants entered into the contract for the construction of defendants' home…”
Repub. Bank v. Modular One LLC, 591 N.W.2d 335 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 5× “MCL 339.2412; MSA 18.425(2412) provides: A person or qualifying officer for a corporation or member of a residential builder or residential maintenance and *449 alteration contractor shall not bring or maintain an action in a court of this state for the collection of…”
HA Smith Lumber & Hardware Co. v. Decina, 670 N.W.2d 729 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 3× “argues that the trial court erred in denying its motion to set aside the order granting *436 the Gobises’ motion for summary disposition of Decina Co.”
Bernard F Hoste, Inc v. Kortz, 324 N.W.2d 46 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982).
“The residential builder’s act provides that no person engaged in the business of a residential builder or residential maintenance and alteration contractor may bring suit under a residential construction or alteration contract without alleging and proving that such person was…”
Calkins v. Midland Funding NCC-2 Corp., 412 F. Supp. 2d 699 (W.D. Mich. 2006).
· cites it 4× “This holding was compelled, however, in light of the express and unambiguous language of the Residential Builders Act, Mich. Comp. Laws § 339.2412 (1), which provides that "[a] person .”
Annex Constr., Inc v. Fenech, 477 N.W.2d 103 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991).
“For the reasons expressed above, we conclude that the trial court erroneously denied defendants’ motion for summary disposition. Accordingly, we reverse the order of the trial court and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 339.2412(1) — 13 cases
Epps v. 4 Quarters Restoration LLC, 872 N.W.2d 412 (Mich. 2015).
“Furthermore, MCL 339.2412 expressly provides a mechanism for its enforcement, apart from civil liability: *535 A prosecuting attorney and the attorney general may bring an action for a civil violation in a court of competent jurisdiction against a person not licensed under this…”
Stokes v. Millen Roofing Co., 649 N.W.2d 371 (Mich. 2002).
“§ 339.2412 barred Millen, an unlicensed contractor, from seeking compensation from plaintiffs under its contract with them for the installation of a slate roof.”
Edgewood Dev. Inc. v. Landskroener, 684 N.W.2d 387 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
“In Annex, which arose out of the trial court’s refusal to grant summary disposition based on MCL 339.2412, the factual predicate was as follows: There is no dispute that at the time plaintiff and defendants entered into the contract for the construction of defendants’ home…”
EDGEWOOD DEV. INC. v. Landskroener, 684 N.W.2d 387 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
“In Annex, which arose out of the trial court's refusal to grant summary disposition based on MCL 339.2412, the factual predicate was as follows: There is no dispute that at the time plaintiff and defendants entered into the contract for the construction of defendants' home…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 339.2412(3) — 2 cases
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 339.2412(4) — 1 case
Epps v. 4 Quarters Restoration LLC, 872 N.W.2d 412 (Mich. 2015).
“Furthermore, MCL 339.2412 expressly provides a mechanism for its enforcement, apart from civil liability: *535 A prosecuting attorney and the attorney general may bring an action for a civil violation in a court of competent jurisdiction against a person not licensed under this…”
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.