Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 450 / Act 305 of 2000
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 450.835 (2026)

Scope of act; terms.

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

UNIFORM ELECTRONIC TRANSACTIONS ACT


Act 305 of 2000


450.835 Scope of act; terms.

Sec. 5.

    (1) This act does not require a record or signature to be created, generated, sent, communicated, received, stored, or otherwise processed or used by electronic means or in electronic form.

    (2) This act applies only to transactions between parties each of which has agreed to conduct transactions by electronic means. Whether the parties agree to conduct a transaction by electronic means is determined from the context and surrounding circumstances, including the parties' conduct.

    (3) A party that agrees to conduct a transaction by electronic means may refuse to conduct other transactions by electronic means. The right granted by this subsection may not be waived by agreement.

    (4) Unless otherwise prohibited by this act, a provision of this act may be varied by agreement.

    (5) Whether an electronic record or electronic signature has legal consequences is determined by this act and other applicable law.

History: 2000, Act 305, Imd. Eff. Oct. 16, 2000

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2005–2025 · leading case: Audi Ag & Volkswagen of Am., Inc. v. Bob D'amato, D/B/A Quattro Enthusiasts, 469 F.3d 534 (6th Cir. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Audi Ag & Volkswagen of Am., Inc. v. Bob D'amato, D/B/A Quattro Enthusiasts, 469 F.3d 534 (6th Cir. 2006). “Mich. Comp. Laws § 450.835 . There is no evidence in the record that Carlson or Grunnah agreed to create a legally binding contract via email authorizing D’Amato to use Audi’s trademarks.”
Audi Ag v. D'amato, 381 F. Supp. 2d 644 (E.D. Mich. 2005). · cites it 4× “Defendant cites Michigan’s Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (“UETA”) MCL § 450.835 which provides: (1) This act does not require a record or signature to be created, generated, sent, communicated, received, stored, or otherwise processed or used by electronic means or in…”
Halabu Holdings, LLC v. Old Nat'l Bancorp (E.D. Mich. 2020). · cites it 9× “See Mich. Comp. Laws § 450.835 et seq. Second, Old National argues that “[e]ven if the parties had agreed to conduct the transaction by electronic means, neither the [TRO/PI] Motion nor the FAC sufficiently show that Mr.”
20250130_C366152_33_366152.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2025). “” MCL 450.835(2). MCL 450.832(h) defines an electronic signature as “an electronic sound, symbol, or process attached to or logically associated with a record and executed or adopted by a person with the intent to sign the record.”
Theodore L Harpham II v. Big Moose Home Inspections Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2015). “MCL 450.835(2); MCL 450.837. An electronic signature is “an electronic sound, symbol, or process attached to or logically associated with a record and executed or adopted by a person with the intent to sign a record.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 450.835(2) — 2 cases
20250130_C366152_33_366152.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2025). “” MCL 450.835(2). MCL 450.832(h) defines an electronic signature as “an electronic sound, symbol, or process attached to or logically associated with a record and executed or adopted by a person with the intent to sign the record.”
Theodore L Harpham II v. Big Moose Home Inspections Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2015). “MCL 450.835(2); MCL 450.837. An electronic signature is “an electronic sound, symbol, or process attached to or logically associated with a record and executed or adopted by a person with the intent to sign a record.”
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.