MICHIGAN ANTITRUST REFORM ACT
Act 274 of 1984
445.781 Limitations.
Sec. 11.
(1) An action under section 7 or 9 is barred if not commenced within 4 years after the claim of relief or cause of action accrues.
(2) An action to recover damages under section 8 is barred if not commenced within 4 years after the claim for relief or cause of action accrues, or within 1 year after the conclusion of any timely action brought by the state under section 7, 8(1), or 9 which is based in whole or in part on any matter complained of in the action for damages, whichever is later.
History: 1984, Act 274, Eff. Mar. 29, 1985
Notes of Decisions
Z Tech. Corp. v. Lubrizol Corp., 753 F.3d 594 (6th Cir. 2014).
· cites it 2× “”); Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 445.781 , 445.784(2) (2009) (“It is the intent of the legislature that in construing all sections of this act, the courts shall give due deference to interpretations given by the federal courts to comparable antitrust statutes, including, without…”
Supreme Auto Transp. LLC v. Arcelor Mittal, 238 F. Supp. 3d 1032 (N.D. Ill. 2017).
· cites it 2× “See Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.781 , Like the fifteen new named plaintiffs, Supreme Auto’s amended allegations do not warrant tolling and are thus untimely.”
In re Nexium, 968 F. Supp. 2d 367 (D. Mass. 2013).
“Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.781 (2) ("An action to recover damages under [the provision of the Michigan Antitrust Reform Act allowing injured parties to bring actions for relief] is barred if not commenced within 4 years after the claim for relief or cause of action accrues .”
DXS, Inc. v. Siemens Med. Sys., Inc., 100 F.3d 462 (6th Cir. 1996).
“Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.781 . An antitrust cause of action accrues and the limitation period commences each time a defendant commits an act that injures the plaintiffs business.”
Manitou North Am. Inc v. McCormick Int'l LLC, No. 324063 (Mich. Ct. App. Feb. 2, 2016).
“Next, with respect to whether the MARA counterclaim should have been dismissed on the basis of the four-year statute of limitations governing the action, MCL 445.781(2), which had indeed expired by the time McCormick amended its counterclaim in September 2010 to add the MARA…”
Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.781(2): 1 case
Manitou North Am. Inc v. McCormick Int'l LLC, No. 324063 (Mich. Ct. App. Feb. 2, 2016).
“Next, with respect to whether the MARA counterclaim should have been dismissed on the basis of the four-year statute of limitations governing the action, MCL 445.781(2), which had indeed expired by the time McCormick amended its counterclaim in September 2010 to add the MARA…”
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.