Michigan Compiled Laws
Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.1105 (2026)
Repealed. 2012, Act 86, Eff. July 1, 2013.
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE
Act 174 of 1962
440.1105 Repealed. 2012, Act 86, Eff. July 1, 2013.
Repealed. 2012, Act 86, Eff. July 1, 2013.
Compiler's Notes:
The repealed section pertained to effectiveness of certain provisions in case of contrary agreements.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases, 1976–2013 · leading case: Moore v. Ferrellgas, Inc., 533 F. Supp. 2d 740 (W.D. Mich. 2008).
Moore v. Ferrellgas, Inc., 533 F. Supp. 2d 740 (W.D. Mich. 2008). “July 18, 1991) (citing Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.1105 (1)). When “a transaction bears a reasonable relation to this state and also to another state or nation the parties may agree that the law either of this state or of such other state or nation shall govern their rights and…”
Allmand Assocs., Inc. v. Hercules Inc., 960 F. Supp. 1216 (E.D. Mich. 1997). “Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.1105 . As the contracts were to be performed in Michigan, they undoubtedly bear a reasonable relation to this state.”
Liberty Mut. Ins. v. Vanderbush Sheet Metal Co., 512 F. Supp. 1159 (E.D. Mich. 1981). “Rowland, supra; Mich.Comp.Laws § 440.1105(1) (Mich.Stat.Ann.”
Zantop Int'l Airlines, Inc. v. E. Airlines, 503 N.W.2d 915 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993). “The Uniform Commercial Code, MCL 440.1105(1); MSA 19.1105(1), permits parties to a contract to agree on a choice of laws: [W]hen a transaction bears a reasonable relationship to this state and also to another state or nation the parties may agree that the law either of this…”
Homac, Inc. v. DSA Fin. Corp., 661 F. Supp. 776 (E.D. Mich. 1987). “According to Michigan Compiled Laws Section 440.1105(1) the parties to a transaction can specify applicable state law.”
Extrusion Painting, Inc. v. Awnings Unlimited, Inc., 37 F. Supp. 2d 985 (E.D. Mich. 1999). “] applies to transactions bearing an appropriate relation to this state.”
Parets v. Eaton Corp., 479 F. Supp. 512 (E.D. Mich. 1979). “The employment contract designated Detroit, Michigan as plaintiff’s post of origin and stated that upon satisfactory conclusion of plaintiff’s foreign assignment he would “be entitled to the same rights, both statutory and company, as would apply under the same circumstances in…”
Boyd v. Direct Capital Corp. (In Re Pizzano), 439 B.R. 445 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 2010). “§ 440.1105. Fairly read, this provision generally honors the parties’ choice of law, limiting that choice with respect to perfection and priority, but not with respect to attachment.”
Harlow & Jones, Inc. v. Advance Steel Co., 424 F. Supp. 770 (E.D. Mich. 1976). “§ 440.1105(1). The result is the same in either event, since both states have enacted the Uniform Commercial Code.”
Telerent Leasing Corp. v. Progressive Med. Imaging PLC, 918 F. Supp. 2d 666 (E.D. Mich. 2013). “” § 440.1105(1). Here, the transaction bears a reasonable—indeed, a substantial relation to Pennsylvania.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.1105(1) — 6 cases
Liberty Mut. Ins. v. Vanderbush Sheet Metal Co., 512 F. Supp. 1159 (E.D. Mich. 1981). “Rowland, supra; Mich.Comp.Laws § 440.1105(1) (Mich.Stat.Ann.”
Zantop Int'l Airlines, Inc. v. E. Airlines, 503 N.W.2d 915 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993). “The Uniform Commercial Code, MCL 440.1105(1); MSA 19.1105(1), permits parties to a contract to agree on a choice of laws: [W]hen a transaction bears a reasonable relationship to this state and also to another state or nation the parties may agree that the law either of this…”
Homac, Inc. v. DSA Fin. Corp., 661 F. Supp. 776 (E.D. Mich. 1987). “According to Michigan Compiled Laws Section 440.1105(1) the parties to a transaction can specify applicable state law.”
Harlow & Jones, Inc. v. Advance Steel Co., 424 F. Supp. 770 (E.D. Mich. 1976). “§ 440.1105(1). The result is the same in either event, since both states have enacted the Uniform Commercial Code.”
Extrusion Painting, Inc. v. Awnings Unlimited, Inc., 37 F. Supp. 2d 985 (E.D. Mich. 1999). “] applies to transactions bearing an appropriate relation to this state.”
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.