Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 450 / Act 284 of 1972
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 450.1122 (2026)

References to repealed acts; statutes inapplicable to corporations defined in MCL 450.1106; uniform voidable transactions act inapplicable to distributions.

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

BUSINESS CORPORATION ACT


Act 284 of 1972


450.1122 References to repealed acts; statutes inapplicable to corporations defined in MCL 450.1106; uniform voidable transactions act inapplicable to distributions.

Sec. 122.

    (1) A reference in any statute of this state to parts of any act that are repealed by this act is considered to be a reference to this act, unless the context requires otherwise.

    (2) The following statutes do not apply to a corporation as defined in section 106:

    (a) 1846 RS 55, MCL 450.504 to 450.525.

    (b) 1955 PA 156, MCL 450.701 to 450.704.

    (3) The uniform voidable transactions act, 1998 PA 434, MCL 566.31 to 566.45, does not apply to distributions governed by this act.

History: 1972, Act 284, Eff. Jan. 1, 1973 ;-- Am. 1989, Act 121, Eff. Oct. 1, 1989 ;-- Am. 2001, Act 57, Imd. Eff. July 23, 2001 ;-- Am. 2016, Act 553, Eff. Apr. 10, 2017

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1999–2014 · leading case: Gold v. Winget (In Re NM Holdings Co.), 407 B.R. 232 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Gold v. Winget (In Re NM Holdings Co.), 407 B.R. 232 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2009). · cites it 2× “” Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 450.1122 (3). Based on this statute, Defendants argue that Gold cannot avoid any of the alleged fraudulent transfers under the MUFTA, but instead must bring any claim under the MBCA.”
Frank v. Zaret (In Re Peet Packing Co.), 231 B.R. 42 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1999). · cites it 3× “Introduction In this opinion, the Court holds that Mich. Comp.Laws § 450.1122(3) does not bar a plaintiff from suing the transferee of a fraudulent conveyance under Mich.”
Buchwald Capital Advisors, LLC v. Papas (In re Greektown Holdings, LLC), 516 B.R. 445 (2014). “” Mich. Comp. Laws § 450.1122 (3). Also, the Michigan Consumer Protection Act specifically limits itself from applying to “[a] transaction or conduct specifically authorized under laws administered by a regulatory board or officer acting under statutory authority of this state…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 450.1122(3) — 1 case
Frank v. Zaret (In Re Peet Packing Co.), 231 B.R. 42 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1999). “Introduction In this opinion, the Court holds that Mich. Comp.Laws § 450.1122(3) does not bar a plaintiff from suing the transferee of a fraudulent conveyance under Mich.”
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.