Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 555.1 (2026)

Uses and trusts; extent of abolition; interests deemed legal.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Revised Statutes of 1846

R.S. of 1846

555.1 Uses and trusts; extent of abolition; interests deemed legal.

Sec. 1.

Uses and trusts, except as authorized and modified in this chapter, are abolished, and every estate and interest in lands shall be deemed a legal right, cognizable as such in the courts of law, except when otherwise provided in this title.

History: R.S. 1846, Ch. 63 ;-- CL 1857, 2631 ;-- CL 1871, 4114 ;-- How. 5563 ;-- CL 1897, 8829 ;-- CL 1915, 11565 ;-- CL 1929, 12967 ;-- CL 1948, 555.1

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1949–2014 · leading case: Nash v. Duncan Park Comm'n, 304 Mich. App. 599 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Nash v. Duncan Park Comm'n, 304 Mich. App. 599 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 4× “The current version, found at MCL 555.1 et seq., is identical to the 1846 version except for minor formatting *616 and punctuation changes not relevant to our discussion.”

Rohde v. Ann Arbor Pub. Schs., 737 N.W.2d 158 (Mich. 2007). · cites it 2× “The crux of plaintiffs' claim is that defendants improperly defined and recognized a new form of domestic relations and treated this relationship as the equivalent of marriage in violation of the Michigan defense of marriage act, MCL 555.1. [1] The circuit court did not reach…”

Judd v. Carnegie, 37 N.W.2d 558 (Mich. 1949). “Laws 1948; § 555.1 et seq. [Stat. Ann. § 26.51 et seq.”

Wilson v. Potter, 63 N.W.2d 413 (Mich. 1954). “]) plaintiff may not claim any resulting trust in her favor based on the assignment of the vendee’s interest under the land contract to defendant and the-deed given in 1946 pursuant to the contract. In determining the intention of the parties at the time of the execution 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.