Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 450.1501 (2026)

Management of corporation; qualifications of director.

✓ 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

450.1501 Management of corporation; qualifications of director.

Sec. 501.

The business and affairs of a corporation shall be managed by or under the direction of its board, except as otherwise provided in this act or in its articles of incorporation. A director need not be a shareholder of the corporation unless the articles or bylaws so require. The articles or bylaws may prescribe qualifications for directors.

History: 1972, Act 284, Eff. Jan. 1, 1973 ;-- Am. 1982, Act 407, Eff. Jan. 1, 1983

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2001–2025 · leading case: Estes v. Idea Eng'g & Fabricating, Inc, 631 N.W.2d 89 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Estes v. Idea Eng'g & Fabricating, Inc, 631 N.W.2d 89 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). “Chapter 5 of the act, MCL 450.1501 et seq., on the other hand, is entitled “Directors and Officers,” and includes sections on terms, elections, committees, and powers and duties of directors and officers.”

Farmington Square Condo. Ass'n v. Keith Mitan (Mich. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 6× “212(5), as the Association’s request for an injunction should have been brought in the district court under that statute; and (3) the complaint violated MCL 450.1501, as the Association’s board of directors did not formally authorize the filing of the instant case.”

Leslie J Murphy v. Samuel M Inman III (Mich. Ct. App. 2020). “Thus, we examine his claim under both relevant statutory authority and caselaw to determine whether the trial court erred when it concluded that his claim could only be brought derivatively.”

Msc 345758 Leslie J Murphy V Samuel M Inman Iii Supremecourtopinion 4/5/2022 (Mich. 2022). “25 MCL 450.1501. 26 Although MCL 450.1545a addresses the duty of loyalty in the context of transactions in which corporate directors or officers have an interest, plaintiff does not allege a breach of defendants’ fiduciary duties under § 545a.”

Leslie J Murphy v. Samuel M Inman III (Mich. 2022). “25 MCL 450.1501. 26 Although MCL 450.1545a addresses the duty of loyalty in the context of transactions in which corporate directors or officers have an interest, plaintiff does not allege a breach of defendants’ fiduciary duties under § 545a.”

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.