LAND DIVISION ACT
Act 288 of 1967
560.224a Joinder of parties defendant.
Sec. 224a.
(1) The plaintiff shall join as parties defendant each of the following:
(a) The owners of record title of each lot or parcel of land included in or located within 300 feet of the lands described in the petition and persons of record claiming under those owners.
(b) The municipality in which the subdivision covered by the plat is located.
(c) The director of the department of energy, labor, and economic growth.
(d) The drain commissioner and the chairperson of the board of county road commissioners having jurisdiction over any of the land included in the plat.
(e) Each public utility which is known to the plaintiff to have installations or equipment in the subdivision or which has a recorded easement or franchise right which would be affected by the proceedings.
(f) The director of the state transportation department and the director of the department of natural resources if any of the subdivision includes or borders a state highway or federal aid road.
(g) If the requested action may result in a public highway or a portion of a public highway that borders upon, crosses, is adjacent to, or ends at a lake or the general course of a stream being vacated or altered in such a manner as would result in the loss of public access, the director of the department of natural resources and, if the subdivision is located in a township, the township. The department of natural resources and, if applicable, the township shall review the application and determine within 30 days whether the property should be retained by the state or township as an ingress and egress point, and shall convey that decision to the court.
(2) Service of process upon the joined parties defendant shall be made in accord with the general rules governing service of process in civil actions except that the parties defendant specified in subsection (1)(b), (f), or (g) may be served by registered mail and the parties defendant specified in subsection (1)(a) may be served by registered mail if there are more than 20 persons that must be joined pursuant to subsection (1)(a).
History: Add. 1978, Act 367, Imd. Eff. July 22, 1978 ;-- Am. 1979, Act 184, Imd. Eff. Dec. 19, 1979 ;-- Am. 1996, Act 219, Imd. Eff. May 28, 1996 ;-- Am. 2010, Act 63, Imd. Eff. May 6, 2010
PopularName Notes:
Plat Act
PopularName Notes:
Subdivision Control
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
9
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1982–2024 · leading case:
Beach v. Lima Twp., 802 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 2011).
Beach v. Lima Twp., 802 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 2011).
· cites it 14× “” MCL 560.224a sets forth the parties that must be joined in actions under the LDA.”
2000 Baum Fam. Trust v. Babel, 793 N.W.2d 633 (Mich. 2010).
· cites it 2× “227a(1); see also MCL 224.18(5) and (8). 12 Abandonment of a highway is subject to extensive statutory procedures and must be approved by the circuit court in the county where the road is located.”
Martin v. Beldean, 677 N.W.2d 312 (Mich. 2004).
· cites it 2× “Here several of these necessary parties were not joined in the lawsuit and it is clear that they have a statutory right to participate fully in the lawsuit.”
Bennett v. Mackinac Bridge Auth., 808 N.W.2d 471 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010).
“3172(3)(d) (mandating the joinder of certain parties as defendants in “assigned claims” litigation under the no-fault act); MCL 560.224a(1) (mandating the joinder of various parties as defendants in actions to revise or vacate recorded plats under the Land Division Act); MCL 600.”
Beach v. Lima Twp., 770 N.W.2d 386 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009).
“MCL 560.224a identifies all the individuals and entities that a plaintiff must join as party defendants in an LDA action.”
Karrip v. Twp. of Cannon, 321 N.W.2d 690 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982).
“Further, although the Subdivision Control Act requires that certain parties, including public officials, be joined as public defendants, MCL 560.224a; MSA 26.430(224a), the language of the act does not lead to the conclusion that only those parties can properly be joined and…”
Gimmy G Tress v. Roscommon Cnty. Road Comm'n (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
“1 Plaintiffs sought to amend the plat to vacate “those parts of the following roads, Summit Road between Lots 22 and 34, and Peach Road between 133 and 136 within the Plat of 1 These parties are required defendants pursuant to MCL 560.224a. -3- Hillcrest” and to vest “fee simple…”
Gimmy G Tress v. Roscommon Cnty. Road Comm'n (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
“1 Plaintiffs sought to amend the plat to vacate “those parts of the following roads, Summit Road between Lots 22 and 34, and Peach Road between 133 and 136 within the Plat of 1 These parties are required defendants pursuant to MCL 560.224a. -3- Hillcrest” and to vest “fee simple…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 560.224a(1) — 1 case
Bennett v. Mackinac Bridge Auth., 808 N.W.2d 471 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010).
“3172(3)(d) (mandating the joinder of certain parties as defendants in “assigned claims” litigation under the no-fault act); MCL 560.224a(1) (mandating the joinder of various parties as defendants in actions to revise or vacate recorded plats under the Land Division Act); MCL 600.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 560.224a(f) — 1 case
Beach v. Lima Twp., 802 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 2011).
“” MCL 560.224a sets forth the parties that must be joined in actions under the LDA.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 560.224a(g) — 1 case
Beach v. Lima Twp., 802 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 2011).
“” MCL 560.224a sets forth the parties that must be joined in actions under the LDA.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 560.224a(l) — 1 case
Martin v. Beldean, 677 N.W.2d 312 (Mich. 2004).
“Here several of these necessary parties were not joined in the lawsuit and it is clear that they have a statutory right to participate fully in the lawsuit.”
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.