Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 552.102 (2026)

Realty owned jointly or by entireties; effect of divorce without determination of ownership in decree.

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

JUDGMENTS OF DIVORCE OR SEPARATE MAINTENANCE


Act 259 of 1909


552.102 Realty owned jointly or by entireties; effect of divorce without determination of ownership in decree.

Sec. 2.

    Every husband and wife owning real estate as joint tenants or as tenants by entireties shall, upon being divorced, become tenants in common of such real estate, unless the ownership thereof is otherwise determined by the decree of divorce.

History: 1909, Act 259, Eff. Sept. 1, 1909 ;-- CL 1915, 11437 ;-- CL 1929, 12767 ;-- CL 1948, 552.102

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 29 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1951–2022 · leading case: United States v. Craft, 535 U.S. 274 (2002).
United States v. Craft, 535 U.S. 274 (2002). · cites it 2× “According to Michigan law, respondent's husband had, among other rights, the following rights with respect to the entireties property: the right to use the property, the right to exclude third parties from it, the right to a share of income produced from it, the right of…”
Estes v. Titus, 751 N.W.2d 493 (Mich. 2008). · cites it 2× “19 MCL 552.102 provides: “Every husband and wife owning real estate as joint tenants or as tenants by entireties shall, upon being divorced, become tenants in common of such real estate, unless the ownership thereof is otherwise determined by the decree of divorce.”
In Re Spears, 308 B.R. 793 (W.D. Mich. 2004). · cites it 6× “Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 552.102 (West 1988).”
Merritt v. Nickelson, 287 N.W.2d 178 (Mich. 1980). · cites it 2× “…by entireties become tenants in common upon being divorced, unless otherwise provided by the judgment of divorce. MCL 552.102; MSA 25.132.”
Tkachik v. Mandeville, 764 N.W.2d 318 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 3× “MCL 552.102; Budwit v Herr, 339 Mich 265, 273 ; 63 NW2d 841 (1954).”
United States v. Certain Real Prop. Located at 2525 Leroy Lane, West Bloomfield, Michigan, Leah Marks, Claimant-Appellee, 972 F.2d 136 (6th Cir. 1992). · cites it 2× “As part of the divorce property settlement, a Michigan state court awarded Leah Marks the entire home under Mich.Comp.Laws § 552.102. On remand, the district court found that Leah Marks was entitled to all of the proceeds of the sale of the house.”
Budwit v. Herr, 63 N.W.2d 841 (Mich. 1954). · cites it 2× “132]) in the event that a husband and wife who are the owners of such an estate are divorced they become tenants in common of the property, except -as the court may make other disposition of it. Obviously, if the theoretic unity of the spouses is destroyed, in other words if the…”
Butler v. Butler, 332 N.W.2d 488 (Mich. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 2× “Under MCL 552.102; MSA 25.132, upon divorce, every husband and wife holding real estate as tenants by the entireties become tenants in common and are entitled to bring an action for partition.”
Olson v. Parker (In Re Parker), 395 B.R. 12 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 2008). · cites it 2× “Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 552.102 (West 1988).”
In Re Guzior, 347 B.R. 237 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2006). · cites it 2× “Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 552.102 (West 1988).”
United States v. Barczyk, 697 F. Supp. 2d 789 (E.D. Mich. 2010). · cites it 2× “§ 552.102). See also In re Ignasiak, 22 B.”
United States v. Noble, 3 F. App'x 331 (6th Cir. 2001). · cites it 2× “Because the government sought to collect unpaid federal income taxes from Noble’s interest in the property, the government and CCA are equally entitled to the proceeds from the sale of the property, as CCA still holds title to the property subject to the rights of the…”
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.