Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 500.2024 (2026)

Unfair methods of competition or deception; rebates and special inducements.

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

THE INSURANCE CODE OF 1956


Act 218 of 1956


500.2024 Unfair methods of competition or deception; rebates and special inducements.

Sec. 2024.

    The following are defined as unfair methods of competition and unfair and deceptive acts or practices in the business of insurance:

    Except as otherwise expressly provided by law, knowingly permitting or offering to make or making any contract of life insurance, life annuity or accident and health insurance, or agreement as to such contract other than as plainly expressed in the contract issued thereon, or paying or allowing, or giving or offering to pay, allow, or give, directly or indirectly, as inducement to such insurance, or annuity, any rebate of premiums payable on the contract, or any special favor or advantage in the dividends or other benefits thereon, or any valuable consideration or inducement whatever not specified in the contract; or giving, or selling, or purchasing or offering to give, sell, or purchase as inducement to such insurance or annuity or in connection therewith, any stocks, bonds, or other securities of any insurance company or other corporation, association, or partnership, or any dividends or profits accrued thereon, or anything of value whatsoever not specified in the contract.

History: 1956, Act 218, Eff. Jan. 1, 1957

PopularName Notes:

Act 218
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1987–1993 · leading case: Katt v. Ins. Bureau, 505 N.W.2d 37 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993).
Katt v. Ins. Bureau, 505 N.W.2d 37 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “MCL 500.2024; MSA 24.12024 states in pertinent part as follows: The following are defined as unfair methods of competition and unfair and deceptive acts or practices in the business of insurance: Except as otherwise expressly provided by law .”
Lawyers Title Ins. v. Chicago Title Ins., 409 N.W.2d 774 (Mich. Ct. App. 1987). “While the distinctions made by the commissioner and in-tervenors are apparent from a comparison of these statutes, we find that inducement to insurance, an ambiguous phrase, must be construed to effect the Legislature’s intent. Hinton v Parole Bd, 148 Mich App 235, 239-240 ; 383…”
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.