Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 487 / Act 276 of 1999
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 487.13703 (2026)

Consolidated bank; rights, privileges, and powers.

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

BANKING CODE OF 1999


Act 276 of 1999


487.13703 Consolidated bank; rights, privileges, and powers.

Sec. 3703.

    (1) If approval and certification of the consolidation agreement as required by section 3701 have been completed, the corporate existence of each consolidating organization is merged into and continued in the consolidated bank. To the extent authorized by this act, the consolidated bank possesses all the rights, interests, privileges, powers, and franchises and is subject to all the restrictions, disabilities, liabilities, and duties of each of the consolidating organizations. The title to all property, real, personal, and mixed, is transferred to the consolidated bank, and shall not revert or be in any way impaired by reason of this act.

    (2) A consolidated bank holds and enjoys the same and all rights of property, franchises, and interests, including appointments, designations, and nominations and all other rights and interests as a fiduciary, in the same manner and to the same extent as those rights and interests were held or enjoyed by each consolidating organization at the time of the consolidation. If a consolidating organization at the time of consolidation was acting under appointment of any court as a fiduciary, the consolidated bank is subject to removal by a court of competent jurisdiction.

    (3) A consolidated bank shall file with each court or other public tribunal, agency, or officer in any state by which any of the consolidating organizations have been appointed as a fiduciary, and in the court file of each estate, suit, or any other proceeding in which any of them has been acting as a fiduciary, an affidavit setting forth the fact of consolidation, the name of each consolidating organization, the name of the consolidated bank, the location of its principal office, and the amount of its capital and surplus. This subsection does not require filing of an affidavit related to any consolidating organization that after the consolidation retains the same corporate name, charter, and principal office location.

    (4) The liability of any consolidating organization or of a shareholder, director, or officer of a consolidating organization, or the rights or remedies of the creditors of, or other persons transacting business with, the consolidating organization shall not be altered or impaired as the result of a consolidation.

History: 1999, Act 276, Eff. Mar. 1, 2000

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2020–2022 · leading case: Comerica Inc v. Dep't of Treasury (Mich. 2022).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Comerica Inc v. Dep't of Treasury (Mich. 2022). · cites it 12× “Thus, regardless of whether the SBTA credits are considered property or privileges, MCL 487.13703 operated to transfer the credits from the Michigan bank to the Texas bank, and no assignment was needed.”
Comerica Inc v. Dep't of Treasury (Mich. 2022). · cites it 12× “Thus, regardless of whether the SBTA credits are considered property or privileges, MCL 487.13703 operated to transfer the credits from the Michigan bank to the Texas bank, and no assignment was needed.”
Comerica Inc v. Dep't of Treasury (Mich. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 5× “Because the tax credits here transferred by operation of law pursuant to the merger statute, MCL 487.13703(1), they were not subject to the single-assignment limitation.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 487.13703(1) — 3 cases
Comerica Inc v. Dep't of Treasury (Mich. 2022). “Thus, regardless of whether the SBTA credits are considered property or privileges, MCL 487.13703 operated to transfer the credits from the Michigan bank to the Texas bank, and no assignment was needed.”
Comerica Inc v. Dep't of Treasury (Mich. 2022). “Thus, regardless of whether the SBTA credits are considered property or privileges, MCL 487.13703 operated to transfer the credits from the Michigan bank to the Texas bank, and no assignment was needed.”
Comerica Inc v. Dep't of Treasury (Mich. Ct. App. 2020). “Because the tax credits here transferred by operation of law pursuant to the merger statute, MCL 487.13703(1), they were not subject to the single-assignment limitation.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 487.13703(2) — 2 cases
Comerica Inc v. Dep't of Treasury (Mich. 2022). “Thus, regardless of whether the SBTA credits are considered property or privileges, MCL 487.13703 operated to transfer the credits from the Michigan bank to the Texas bank, and no assignment was needed.”
Comerica Inc v. Dep't of Treasury (Mich. 2022). “Thus, regardless of whether the SBTA credits are considered property or privileges, MCL 487.13703 operated to transfer the credits from the Michigan bank to the Texas bank, and no assignment was needed.”
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.