Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 445 / Act 274 of 1984
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.788 (2026)

Effect of repeals.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

MICHIGAN ANTITRUST REFORM ACT


Act 274 of 1984


445.788 Effect of repeals.

Sec. 18.

    The repeal of any statute or part thereof contained herein shall not have the effect to release, relinquish or affect any crime, penalty, fine, forfeiture or liability committed or incurred under such repealed statute or part thereof, and such repealed statute or part thereof shall remain in force for the purpose of instituting or sustaining any proper action or prosecution for the enforcement of any penalty, fine, forfeiture or liability.

History: 1984, Act 274, Eff. Mar. 29, 1985

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1985–1998 · leading case: Rehmann, Robson & Co. v. McMahan, 466 N.W.2d 325 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Rehmann, Robson & Co. v. McMahan, 466 N.W.2d 325 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991). “70(17), which took effect on March 29, 1985. However, § 18 of the Antitrust Reform Act contains a saving clause which provides that a statute repealed by the act is to remain in force for the purpose of instituting or sustaining any proper action for the enforcement of any…”
McElwee v. Wharton, 19 F. Supp. 2d 766 (W.D. Mich. 1998). · cites it 2× “Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.788 . It also contained the following provision • relating to agreements not to compete: (1) An employer may obtain from an employee an agreement or covenant which protects an employer’s reasonable competitive business interests and which expressly…”
Cardiology Assocs. of Sw. Michigan, Pc v. Zencka, 400 N.W.2d 606 (Mich. Ct. App. 1985). “Section 18 of the Michigan Antitrust Reform Act contains a saving clause which provides that a statute repealed by the act shall remain in force for the purpose of instituting or sustaining any proper action for the enforcement of any liability.”
Thompson Recruitment Advert., Inc. v. Wedes, 651 F. Supp. 107 (E.D. Mich. 1986). “§ 445.788 (West Supp.1986). Wedes claims this provision mandates application of the law in effect at the time he signed the employment contract.”
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.