Michigan Compiled Laws
Mich. Comp. Laws § 556.132 (2026)
Applicability of act.
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
POWERS OF APPOINTMENT ACT OF 1967
Act 224 of 1967
556.132 Applicability of act.
Sec. 22.
The provisions of this act are applicable to any power existing on the effective date of this act, as well as a power created after that date.
History: 1967, Act 224, Eff. Nov. 2, 1967
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1975–2025 · leading case: Chires v. Cumulus Broad., LLC, 543 F. Supp. 2d 712 (E.D. Mich. 2008).
Chires v. Cumulus Broad., LLC, 543 F. Supp. 2d 712 (E.D. Mich. 2008). “§ 556.132; ... while an agreement for an indefinite term is generally regarded as not being within the proscription of the statute of frauds.”
In Re Hund Est., 235 N.W.2d 331 (Mich. 1975). “MCLA 556.132; MSA 26.155(122) reads: "The provisions of this act are applicable to any power existing on the effective date of this act, as well as a power created after that date.”
Ramirez v. Int'l Bus. Machines Corp., 829 F. Supp. 2d 555 (E.D. Mich. 2011). “A contract for a definite term has been generally regarded to be within the section of the statute of frauds concerning an ‘agreement that, by its terms, is not to be performed within 1 year from the making thereof,’ M.”
Hund v. Holmes, 235 N.W.2d 331 (Mich. 1975). “MCLA 556.132; MSA 26.155(122) reads: "The provisions of this act are applicable to any power existing on the effective date of this act, as well as a power created after that date.”
Gloria Kato Karungi v. Ronald Lee Ejalu (Mich. Ct. App. 2021). “Generally, Michigan’s “statute of frauds, MCL 556.132, requires certain types of agreements to be in writing before they can be enforced.”
Bowles v. Sabree (E.D. Mich. 2022). “2020) (“We hold that plaintiffs, former property owners whose 2 Plaintiffs cite Mich. Comp. Laws § 556.132 (1)(f), but the Court presumes this is a typographical error.”
Sizzling Black Rock Steak House Franchising, Inc. v. Black Rock Coral Springs, LLC (E.D. Mich. 2025). “§ 556.132. But the complaint alleges that the Strems Defendants have breached their own obligations under the franchise agreement, not that they have breached their obligation to answer for the breach of the franchisee.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 556.132(1)(g) — 1 case
Gloria Kato Karungi v. Ronald Lee Ejalu (Mich. Ct. App. 2021). “Generally, Michigan’s “statute of frauds, MCL 556.132, requires certain types of agreements to be in writing before they can be enforced.”
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.