Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 440 / Act 174 of 1962
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 440.3101 (2026)

Short title; article.

✓ 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


440.3101 Short title; article.

Sec. 3101.

    This article shall be known and may be cited as "uniform commercial code—negotiable instruments".

History: 1962, Act 174, Eff. Jan. 1, 1964 ;-- Am. 1993, Act 130, Eff. Sept. 30, 1993

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1981–2021 · leading case: Trentadue v. Buckler Automatic Lawn Sprinkler Co., 479 Mich. 378 (Mich. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Trentadue v. Buckler Automatic Lawn Sprinkler Co., 479 Mich. 378 (Mich. 2007). · cites it 2× “However, in Hoerstman, the statute at issue was Article 3 of the Uniform Commercial Code, MCL 440.3101 et seq. The question we faced was whether after the enactment of MCL 440.”
Hoerstman Gen. Contracting, Inc v. Hahn, 711 N.W.2d 340 (Mich. 2006). “” MCL 440.3101. It is compendious and by its terms is intended to apply to all negotiable instruments with limited exceptions not relevant here.”
Portage Aluminum Co. v. Kentwood Nat. Bank, 307 N.W.2d 761 (Mich. Ct. App. 1981). “MCL 440.3101 et seq.; MSA 19.3101 et seq.”
Stone v. Mehlberg, 728 F. Supp. 1341 (W.D. Mich. 1990). “§ 440.3101 et seq., as amended. The Mehlbergs also rely on the U.”
Mut. Sav. & Loan v. Nat'l Bank of Detroit, 462 N.W.2d 797 (Mich. Ct. App. 1990). “MCL 440.3101 et seq.; MSA 19.3101 et seq.”
Gorshe v. Watersmeet Twp. Sch. Dist., 106 Mich. App. 290 (Mich. Ct. App. 1981). “MCL 440.3101 et seq.; MSA 19.3101 et seq.”
Rene Marie Sturdavent v. William Sim Spencer (Mich. Ct. App. 2020). “2982; negotiable instruments, MCL 440.3101 through MCL 440.3605; certain banking transactions, MCL 440.”
Joseph & Anita Russell Trust v. Joshua J Russell (Mich. Ct. App. 2021). “-5- The parties and the trial court agreed that the promissory note is governed by the Uniform Commercial Code–Negotiable Instruments, MCL 440.3101 et seq. MCL 440.3108 provides, in pertinent part: (1) A promise or order is “payable on demand” if it: (a) States that it is…”
Joseph & Anita Russell Trust v. Joshua J Russell (Mich. Ct. App. 2021). “-5- The parties and the trial court agreed that the promissory note is governed by the Uniform Commercial Code–Negotiable Instruments, MCL 440.3101 et seq. MCL 440.3108 provides, in pertinent part: (1) A promise or order is “payable on demand” if it: (a) States that it is…”
Wilmington Sav. Fund Soc'y Fsb v. Alex Schmidt (Mich. Ct. App. 2021). “2 The trial court found that the $19,600 Note was a promissory note governed by Article 3 of Michigan’s Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), MCL 440.3101 et seq. In a footnote to his brief on appeal, Schmidt argues: Plaintiff’s “reliance on MCL 440.”
Est of Margarette F Eby v. Buckler Automatic Lawn Sprinkler Co (Mich. 2007). “However, in Hoerstman, the statute at issue was Article 3 of the Uniform Commercial Code, MCL 440.3101 et seq. The question we faced was whether after the enactment of MCL 440.”
Manoushag Al-Raeis v. Aurora Bank Fsb (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). “3204 in effect at the time of the sheriff’s sale provided, in relevant part: (1) Subject to subsection (4), a party may foreclose a mortgage by advertisement if all of the following circumstances exist: *** (d) The party foreclosing the mortgage is either the owner of the…”
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.