Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 445 / Act 331 of 1976

Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.904

Exemptions; burden of proof.

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

MICHIGAN CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT


Act 331 of 1976


445.904 Exemptions; burden of proof.

Sec. 4.

    (1) This act does not apply to either of the following:

    (a) A transaction or conduct specifically authorized under laws administered by a regulatory board or officer acting under statutory authority of this state or the United States.

    (b) An act done by the publisher, owner, agent, or employee of a newspaper, periodical, directory, radio or television station, or other communications medium in the publication or dissemination of an advertisement unless the publisher, owner, agent, or employee knows or, under the circumstances, reasonably should know of the false, misleading, or deceptive character of the advertisement or has a direct financial interest in the sale or distribution of the advertised goods, property, or service.

    (2) Except for the purposes of an action filed by a person under section 11, this act does not apply to or create a cause of action for an unfair, unconscionable, or deceptive method, act, or practice that is made unlawful by any of the following:

    (a) The banking code of 1999, 1999 PA 276, MCL 487.11101 to 487.15105.

    (b) 1939 PA 3, MCL 460.1 to 460.11.

    (c) The motor carrier act, 1933 PA 254, MCL 475.1 to 479.43.

    (d) The savings bank act, 1996 PA 354, MCL 487.3101 to 487.3804.

    (e) The credit union act, 2003 PA 215, MCL 490.101 to 490.601.

    (3) This act does not apply to or create a cause of action for an unfair, unconscionable, or deceptive method, act, or practice that is made unlawful by chapter 20 of the insurance code of 1956, 1956 PA 218, MCL 500.2001 to 500.2093, if either of the following is met:

    (a) The method, act, or practice occurred on or after March 28, 2001.

    (b) The method, act, or practice occurred before March 28, 2001. However, this subdivision does not apply to or limit a cause of action filed with a court concerning a method, act, or practice if the cause of action was filed in a court of competent jurisdiction on or before June 5, 2014.

    (4) The burden of proving an exemption from this act is upon the person claiming the exemption.

History: 1976, Act 331, Eff. Apr. 1, 1977 ;-- Am. 1993, Act 10, Imd. Eff. Mar. 31, 1993 ;-- Am. 2000, Act 432, Eff. Mar. 28, 2001 ;-- Am. 2003, Act 216, Imd. Eff. Dec. 2, 2003 ;-- Am. 2014, Act 251, Eff. Mar. 31, 2015

Compiler's Notes:

    Enacting section 1 of Act 251 of 2014 provides:

    "Enacting section 1. This amendatory act is retroactive and is effective March 28, 2001."

    Enacting section 2 of Act 251 of 2014 provides:

    "Enacting section 2. This amendatory act is curative and intended to prevent any misinterpretation that this act applies to or creates a cause of action for an unfair, unconscionable, or deceptive method, act, or practice occurring before March 28, 2001 that is made unlawful by chapter 20 of the insurance code of 1956, 1956 PA 218, MCL 500.2001 to 500.2093, that may result from the decision of the Michigan supreme court in Converse v Auto Club Group Ins Co, No. 142917, October 26, 2012. "

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 92 cases (25 in the last 5 years), 1981–2025 · leading case: Dell v. Citizens Insurance Company of America
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dell v. Citizens Insurance Company of America (2015) michctapp · cites it 29× “” 11 In response to Smith, our Legislature amended MCL 445.904 to provide that without exception, the MCPA does not apply to conduct “made unlawful by chapter 20 of the insurance code .”
Liss v. Lewiston-Richards, Inc (2007) mich · cites it 22× “We hold that under MCL 445.904(1)(a), residential home builders are exempt from the MCPA because the general transaction of residential home building, including contracting to perform such transaction, is "specifically authorized" by the Michigan Occupational Code (MOC), MCL 339.”
Smith v. Globe Life Insurance (1999) mich · cites it 13× “[MCL 445.904; MSA 19.418(4).] Thus, ž 4(2)(a) specifically exempts from the MCPA unfair, unconscionable, or deceptive methods, acts, or practices made unlawful by chapter 20 of the Insurance Code.”
Grant v. AAA Michigan/Wisconsin, Inc. (2006) michctapp · cites it 13× “” Nevertheless, the earlier version of MCL 445.904 permitted a plaintiff to bring an MCPA lawsuit under MCL 445.”
Lucas v. Awaad (2013) michctapp · cites it 5× “” With respect to the exception in MCL 445.904(1)(a), plaintiffs argued that it was an affirmative defense and that they were not required to plead facts in avoidance of the defense in order to state a valid claim for relief.”
Robertson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. (1995) mied · cites it 15× “Mich.Comp.Laws § 445.904(2). 3 .The statute goes on to list (a) through (c); (a) references any act unlawful under section 3(1), while (b) and (c) address instances where the alleged unlawful act is affirmed by a decision of the courts.”
Kraft v. Detroit Entertainment, LLC (2004) michctapp · cites it 8× “MCL 445.904(1)(a). Because the operation of these slot machines is specifically authorized by the Michigan Gaming Control Board (MGCB), defendants are exempt from plaintiffs MCPA claims.”
Hoving v. Transnation Title Insurance (2008) mied · cites it 8× “” Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.904 (1)(a). And the “act does not apply to or create a cause of action for an unfair, unconscionable, or deceptive method, act, or practice that is made unlawful by chapter 20 of the insurance code of 1956, 1956 PA 218 , MCL 500.”
McLiechey v. Bristol West Insurance (2006) miwd · cites it 8× “§ 445.904 enacted in 2000 eliminated the ability to bring a MCPA claim against an insurance company under M.”
In re Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co. Mktg. & Sales Practices & Prods. Liab. Litig. (2017) nmd · cites it 5× “" Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.904 (1)(a). When considering whether the MCPA applies, a court's focus should be directed at whether "the transaction at issue, not the alleged misconduct, is 'specifically authorized.”
Dressel v. Ameribank (2003) mich · cites it 2× “Consequently, given that the fees were excessive under the Credit Reform Act, they were not authorized by the SBA.”
Buntea v. State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance (2006) mied · cites it 8× “” Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.904 (3). This amendment was effective March 28, 2001.”
Show all 92 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.904(1) — 10 cases
Smith v. Globe Life Insurance (1999) mich “[MCL 445.904; MSA 19.418(4).] Thus, ž 4(2)(a) specifically exempts from the MCPA unfair, unconscionable, or deceptive methods, acts, or practices made unlawful by chapter 20 of the Insurance Code.”
Dell v. Citizens Insurance Company of America (2015) michctapp “” 11 In response to Smith, our Legislature amended MCL 445.904 to provide that without exception, the MCPA does not apply to conduct “made unlawful by chapter 20 of the insurance code .”
Grant v. AAA Michigan/Wisconsin, Inc. (2006) michctapp “” Nevertheless, the earlier version of MCL 445.904 permitted a plaintiff to bring an MCPA lawsuit under MCL 445.”
Hartman & Eichhorn Bldg. Co., Inc. v. Dailey (2005) michctapp
McLiechey v. Bristol West Insurance (2006) miwd “§ 445.904 enacted in 2000 eliminated the ability to bring a MCPA claim against an insurance company under M.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.904(1)(A) — 2 cases
Miranda v. Michigan (2001) mied
Eastpointe DWC, L.L.C. d/b/a Detroit Wing Company v. Wing Snob Inc. (2021) mied
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.904(1)(a) — 30 cases
Liss v. Lewiston-Richards, Inc (2007) mich “We hold that under MCL 445.904(1)(a), residential home builders are exempt from the MCPA because the general transaction of residential home building, including contracting to perform such transaction, is "specifically authorized" by the Michigan Occupational Code (MOC), MCL 339.”
Kraft v. Detroit Entertainment, LLC (2004) michctapp “MCL 445.904(1)(a). Because the operation of these slot machines is specifically authorized by the Michigan Gaming Control Board (MGCB), defendants are exempt from plaintiffs MCPA claims.”
Lucas v. Awaad (2013) michctapp “” With respect to the exception in MCL 445.904(1)(a), plaintiffs argued that it was an affirmative defense and that they were not required to plead facts in avoidance of the defense in order to state a valid claim for relief.”
Kraft v. Detroit Entertainment, LLC (2004) michctapp
Smith v. Globe Life Insurance (1999) mich “[MCL 445.904; MSA 19.418(4).] Thus, ž 4(2)(a) specifically exempts from the MCPA unfair, unconscionable, or deceptive methods, acts, or practices made unlawful by chapter 20 of the Insurance Code.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.904(2) — 8 cases
Dell v. Citizens Insurance Company of America (2015) michctapp “” 11 In response to Smith, our Legislature amended MCL 445.904 to provide that without exception, the MCPA does not apply to conduct “made unlawful by chapter 20 of the insurance code .”
Smith v. Globe Life Insurance (1999) mich “[MCL 445.904; MSA 19.418(4).] Thus, ž 4(2)(a) specifically exempts from the MCPA unfair, unconscionable, or deceptive methods, acts, or practices made unlawful by chapter 20 of the Insurance Code.”
Grant v. AAA Michigan/Wisconsin, Inc. (2006) michctapp “” Nevertheless, the earlier version of MCL 445.904 permitted a plaintiff to bring an MCPA lawsuit under MCL 445.”
McLiechey v. Bristol West Insurance (2006) miwd “§ 445.904 enacted in 2000 eliminated the ability to bring a MCPA claim against an insurance company under M.”
Robertson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. (1995) mied “Mich.Comp.Laws § 445.904(2). 3 .The statute goes on to list (a) through (c); (a) references any act unlawful under section 3(1), while (b) and (c) address instances where the alleged unlawful act is affirmed by a decision of the courts.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.904(2)(a) — 4 cases
Smith v. Globe Life Insurance (1999) mich “[MCL 445.904; MSA 19.418(4).] Thus, ž 4(2)(a) specifically exempts from the MCPA unfair, unconscionable, or deceptive methods, acts, or practices made unlawful by chapter 20 of the Insurance Code.”
Robertson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. (1995) mied “Mich.Comp.Laws § 445.904(2). 3 .The statute goes on to list (a) through (c); (a) references any act unlawful under section 3(1), while (b) and (c) address instances where the alleged unlawful act is affirmed by a decision of the courts.”
Dell v. Citizens Insurance Company of America (2015) michctapp “” 11 In response to Smith, our Legislature amended MCL 445.904 to provide that without exception, the MCPA does not apply to conduct “made unlawful by chapter 20 of the insurance code .”
Smith v. Globe Life Insurance (1997) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.904(2)(d) — 2 cases
Dressel v. Ameribank (2003) mich “Consequently, given that the fees were excessive under the Credit Reform Act, they were not authorized by the SBA.”
Dressel v. Ameribank (2001) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.904(3) — 8 cases
Dell v. Citizens Insurance Company of America (2015) michctapp “” 11 In response to Smith, our Legislature amended MCL 445.904 to provide that without exception, the MCPA does not apply to conduct “made unlawful by chapter 20 of the insurance code .”
Buntea v. State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance (2006) mied “” Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.904 (3). This amendment was effective March 28, 2001.”
Grant v. AAA Michigan/Wisconsin, Inc. (2006) michctapp “” Nevertheless, the earlier version of MCL 445.904 permitted a plaintiff to bring an MCPA lawsuit under MCL 445.”
McLiechey v. Bristol West Insurance (2006) miwd “§ 445.904 enacted in 2000 eliminated the ability to bring a MCPA claim against an insurance company under M.”
Grant v. AAA MICHIGAN/WISCONSIN, INC. (2007) mich
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.904(3)(a) — 1 case
Dell v. Citizens Insurance Company of America (2015) michctapp “” 11 In response to Smith, our Legislature amended MCL 445.904 to provide that without exception, the MCPA does not apply to conduct “made unlawful by chapter 20 of the insurance code .”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.904(3)(b) — 1 case
Dell v. Citizens Insurance Company of America (2015) michctapp “” 11 In response to Smith, our Legislature amended MCL 445.904 to provide that without exception, the MCPA does not apply to conduct “made unlawful by chapter 20 of the insurance code .”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.904(4) — 3 cases
Liss v. Lewiston-Richards, Inc (2007) mich “We hold that under MCL 445.904(1)(a), residential home builders are exempt from the MCPA because the general transaction of residential home building, including contracting to perform such transaction, is "specifically authorized" by the Michigan Occupational Code (MOC), MCL 339.”
Deacon v. Pandora Media, Inc. (2012) cand
Steven Hinderer v. Marcus Snyder (2019) michctapp
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.904(l)(a) — 25 cases
Robertson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. (1995) mied “Mich.Comp.Laws § 445.904(2). 3 .The statute goes on to list (a) through (c); (a) references any act unlawful under section 3(1), while (b) and (c) address instances where the alleged unlawful act is affirmed by a decision of the courts.”
Smith v. Globe Life Insurance (1999) mich “[MCL 445.904; MSA 19.418(4).] Thus, ž 4(2)(a) specifically exempts from the MCPA unfair, unconscionable, or deceptive methods, acts, or practices made unlawful by chapter 20 of the Insurance Code.”
Dell v. Citizens Insurance Company of America (2015) michctapp “” 11 In response to Smith, our Legislature amended MCL 445.904 to provide that without exception, the MCPA does not apply to conduct “made unlawful by chapter 20 of the insurance code .”
Grant v. AAA Michigan/Wisconsin, Inc. (2006) michctapp “” Nevertheless, the earlier version of MCL 445.904 permitted a plaintiff to bring an MCPA lawsuit under MCL 445.”
BROWNLOW v. McCALL ENTERPRISES, INC (2016) michctapp
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.