Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 390.1 (2026)

University of Michigan; continuation.

✓ current as of July 2026

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

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN

Act 151 of 1851

390.1 University of Michigan; continuation.

Sec. 1.

That the institution established in this state and known as the university of Michigan, is continued under the name and style heretofore used.

History: 1851, Act 151, Eff. July 5, 1851 ;-- CL 1857, 2183 ;-- CL 1871, 3481 ;-- How. 4905 ;-- CL 1897, 1781 ;-- CL 1915, 1156 ;-- CL 1929, 7764 ;-- CL 1948, 390.1

FormerLaw Notes:

See 2 Terr. Laws, p. 104; 1 Terr. Laws, p. 879; Act 55 of 1837, Ex. Sess.; R.S. 1838, Part First, Title 11, Ch. 2; R.S. 1846, Ch. 57.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1981–2019 · leading case: Manuel v. Gill, 753 N.W.2d 48 (Mich. 2008).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Manuel v. Gill, 753 N.W.2d 48 (Mich. 2008). · cites it 2× “The University of Michigan is designated an "institution" under MCL 390.1. Although we are unaware of any law creating an "arm" of the state, we note that the term is commonly defined as "an administrative or operational branch of an organization: an investigative arm of the…”

Holzer v. Oakland Univ., 313 N.W.2d 124 (Mich. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 2× “Of this sum, $44,804,600 was allocated for grants and financial aid and $593,908,500 was allocated for state colleges and universities.”

Crook v. Baker, 584 F. Supp. 1531 (E.D. Mich. 1984). “§§ 390.1, et seq.; 390.11. Plaintiff’s claim is that the actions of defendants have deprived him of substantial procedural and substantive due process rights which are guaranteed to him under the Fourteenth Amendment.”

John C Haedrich v. Joshua M Akers (Mich. Ct. App. 2019). “Accordingly, the University of Michigan is expressly authorized and mandated by statute to operate an institution of higher learning and to provide Michiganders and other inhabitants with education in the various branches of academics.”

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.