Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 462.317 (2026)

Clear vision areas; expenditure of funds relating to high speed rail corridor.

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

RAILROAD CODE OF 1993


Act 354 of 1993


462.317 Clear vision areas; expenditure of funds relating to high speed rail corridor.

Sec. 317.

    (1) If a road authority determines to establish a clear vision area as described in this section, the railroad and a road authority may agree in writing for clear vision areas with respect to a particular crossing. The portions of the right-of-way and property owned and controlled by the respective parties within an area to be provided for clear vision shall be considered as dedicated to the joint usage of both railroad and road authority.

    (2) The acquisition of right-of-way, purchase and removal of obstructions within a clear vision area, including buildings and other artificial constructions, trees, brush, and other growths, and grading or earthwork, and including the maintenance of such conditions, shall be at the equal cost and expense of the railroad and road authority.

    (3) For public, farm, bicycle, pedestrian, or other private crossings of the railroad tracks of a high speed rail corridor, state, federal, and other funds may be expended in accordance with section 301(4) for construction of access roads, purchase of real estate, purchase of private crossing easements, compensation for crossing closure, utility relocation, costs associated with improvements to traffic control devices, grade crossing closures, relocations, consolidations, and separations.

History: 1993, Act 354, Imd. Eff. Jan. 14, 1994

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1997–2015 · leading case: Paddock v. Tuscola & Saginaw Bay Ry. Co., 571 N.W.2d 564 (Mich. Ct. App. 1997).
Paddock v. Tuscola & Saginaw Bay Ry. Co., 571 N.W.2d 564 (Mich. Ct. App. 1997). “Section 317 of the Railroad Code of 1993, MCL 462.317; MSA 22.1263(317), provides in relevant part: (1) If a road authority determines to establish a clear vision area as described in this section, the railroad and a road authority may agree in writing for clear vision areas…”
Est. of Bradley Corl v. Huron & E. Ry. (Mich. 2015). “The parties shall file supplemental briefs within 42 days of the date of this order addressing: (1) whether the Court of Appeals decision conflicts with Paddock v Tuscola & Saginaw Bay Railway Company, 225 Mich App 526 (1997), and MCL 462.317; and (2) whether Paddock was…”
Est. of Bradley Corl v. Huron & E. Ry. (Mich. 2015). “The parties shall file supplemental briefs within 42 days of the date of this order addressing: (1) whether the Court of Appeals decision conflicts with Paddock v Tuscola & Saginaw Bay Railway Company, 225 Mich App 526 (1997), and MCL 462.317; and (2) whether Paddock was…”
Corl v. Huron & E. Ry. Co., 868 N.W.2d 914 (Mich. 2015). “The parties shall file supplemental briefs within 42 days of the date of this order addressing: (1) whether the Court of Appeals decision conflicts with Paddock v Tuscola & Saginaw Bay Railway Company, 225 Mich App 526 (1997), and MCL 462.317; and (2) whether Paddock was…”
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.