Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 500.2041 (2026)

Unfair methods of competition or deception; court review of orders, findings of fact conclusive, modification; additional evidence.

✓ 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

500.2041 Unfair methods of competition or deception; court review of orders, findings of fact conclusive, modification; additional evidence.

Sec. 2041.

(1) Any order or decision of the commissioner under this uniform trade practices act shall be subject to review as provided in section 244. The findings of fact of the commissioner, and any modification thereof as provided for in subsection (2) of this section, if supported by the preponderance of the evidence, shall be conclusive.

(2) To the extent that the order of the commissioner is affirmed, the court shall thereupon issue its own order commanding obedience to the terms of such order of the commissioner. If either party shall apply to the court for leave to adduce additional evidence, and shall show to the satisfaction of the court that such additional evidence is material and that there were reasonable grounds for the failure to adduce such evidence in the proceeding before the commissioner, the court may order such additional evidence to be taken before the commissioner and to be adduced upon the hearing in such manner and upon such terms and conditions as to the court may seem proper. The commissioner may modify his findings of fact, or make new findings by reason of the additional evidence so taken, and he shall file such modified or new findings, which, if supported by the preponderance of the evidence, shall be conclusive, and his recommendation, if any, for the modification or setting aside of his original order, with the return of such additional evidence.

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

PopularName Notes:

Act 218

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases, 1982–1992 · leading case: Kassab v. Michigan Basic Prop. Ins., 491 N.W.2d 545 (Mich. 1992).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Kassab v. Michigan Basic Prop. Ins., 491 N.W.2d 545 (Mich. 1992). · cites it 4× “MCL 500.2041; MSA 24.12041. Among other things, the commissioner is empowered to issue cease and desist orders, which may include payment of a monetary penalty, suspension or revocation of the person's license, and refund of any overcharges.”

Bell v. League Life Ins., 387 N.W.2d 154 (Mich. Ct. App. 1986). “12034, and may issde cease and desist orders, which may include payment of a monetary penalty, suspension or revocation of the person’s license, and refund of any overcharges.”

Mich Life Ins Co v. Ins Comm'r, 328 N.W.2d 82 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982). “[3] MCL 500.2041; MSA 24.12041 provides: "(1) Any order or decision of the commissioner under this uniform trade practices act shall be subject to review as provided in section 244.”

Safie Enter., Inc. v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins., 381 N.W.2d 747 (Mich. Ct. App. 1985). “12040), and provides for court review of administrative proceedings (MCL 500.2041; MSA 24.12041) and criminal penalties for violations (MCL 500.”

Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. COMM'R OF INS., 341 N.W.2d 841 (Mich. Ct. App. 1983). “The commissioner's factual determinations under § 2012 are to be reviewed under the *617 more lenient standard set forth in § 2041 of the Insurance Code of 1956, as amended, MCL 500.2041; MSA 24.12041. See Michigan Life Ins Co v Comm'r of Ins, 120 Mich App 552 ; 328 NW2d 82…”

Nationwide Mut. Ins. v. Comm'r of Ins., 341 N.W.2d 841 (Mich. Ct. App. 1983). “The commissioner’s factual determinations under § 2012 are to be reviewed under the *617 more lenient standard set forth in § 2041 of the Insurance Code of 1956, as amended, MCL 500.”

Michigan Life Ins. v. Comm'r of Ins., 328 N.W.2d 82 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982). “3 MCL 500.2041; MSA 24.12041 provides: "(1) Any order or decision of the commissioner under this uniform trade practices act shall be subject to review as provided in section 244.”

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.