Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 560.227a (2026)

Vesting of title upon vacation of plat, street, or alley; legal description of abutting lot.

✓ current as of July 2026

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

LAND DIVISION ACT

Act 288 of 1967

560.227a Vesting of title upon vacation of plat, street, or alley; legal description of abutting lot.

Sec. 227a.

(1) Title to any part of the plat vacated by the court's judgment, other than a street or alley, shall vest in the rightful proprietor of that part. Title to a street or alley the full width of which is vacated by the court's judgment shall vest in the rightful proprietors of the lots, within the subdivision covered by the plat, abutting the street or alley. Title to a public highway or portion of a public highway that borders on, is adjacent to, or ends at a lake or the general course of a stream may vest in the state subject to section 226.

(2) If the lots abutting the vacated street or alley on both sides belong to the same proprietor, title to the vacated street or alley shall vest in that proprietor. If the lots on opposite sides of the vacated street or alley belong to different proprietors, title up to the center line of the vacated street or alley shall vest in the respective proprietors of the abutting lots on each side.

(3) If only part of the width of a street or alley, not extending beyond the center line, is vacated, title to the vacated part of the street or alley shall vest in the proprietor of the lots abutting the same.

(4) When title to any part of a vacated street or alley vests in an abutting proprietor, any future legal description of the abutting lot or lots shall include that part of the vacated street or alley.

History: Add. 1978, Act 367, Imd. Eff. July 22, 1978 ;-- Am. 1996, Act 219, Imd. Eff. May 28, 1996

PopularName Notes:

Plat Act

PopularName Notes:

Subdivision Control

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 11 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1982–2024 · leading case: 2000 Baum Fam. Trust v. Babel, 793 N.W.2d 633 (Mich. 2010).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

2000 Baum Fam. Trust v. Babel, 793 N.W.2d 633 (Mich. 2010). · cites it 10× “” MCL 560.227a. In light of these principles, to decide that front-lot plaintiffs are not to be deemed riparian because they do not own the soil, as they would if the road were an easement, would be a distortion of well-established law recognizing that plaintiffs and similarly…”

Beach v. Lima Twp., 802 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 2011). · cites it 2× “vacated—that is, if a court determined that the plaintiffs had failed to accept the dedication or abandoned the street—the defendants would, by operation of law, own the vacated portions of the street because, as reflected in the plat, they were abutting landowners.”

Nelson v. Roscommon Cnty. Road Comm'n, 323 N.W.2d 621 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982). “Although title to a street which is vacated by court judgment vests in the abutting property owners, MCL 560.227a; MSA 26.430(227a), the back-lot property owners’ right to use the platted street, a right in the nature of an easement, may remain unimpaired.”

Gimmy G Tress v. Roscommon Cnty. Road Comm'n (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 4× “-3- Hillcrest” and to vest “fee simple title absolute to the adjacent abutting lot owners, pursuant to” MCL 560.227a of the Land Division Act, MCL 560.”

Prismatic Found. v. Eliot Street LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 4× “See MCL 560.227a(2). After the Red Cross completed its development, the Club members began regularly using the Red Cross’s parking lot unimpeded and traversed by foot from the parking lot along the concrete walkway to enter the Club.”

Red Ribbon Props., LLC v. Brighton Twp., 745 N.W.2d 753 (Mich. 2008). “Under Section 227a(1) of the LDA, MCL 560.227a(1), the circuit court properly determined that the whole of the vacated drive in question should be vested in the rightful owners of the adjacent lots "within the subdivision covered by the plat .”

David Fertel v. Vill. of Wolverine Lake (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “Pursuant to MCL 560.227a(2) where a platted roadway is vacated, “[i]f the lots on either side of the vacated street or alley belong to different [owners], title up to the center line of the vacated street or alley shall vest in the respective [owners] of the abutting lots on…”

Shower Curtain Solutions Ltd LLC v. First Am. Title Ins Co (Mich. Ct. App. 2020). “” Mich Central R Co v Miller, 172 Mich 201, 208 ; 137 NW 555 (1912); see also MCL 560.227a(2). However, more specific terms in a contract control over general terms.”

Sanford Lake Pres. Ass'n v. Jill Couch (Mich. Ct. App. 2024). “However, MCL 560.227a provides: -6- (1) Title to any part of the plat vacated by the court’s judgment, other than a street or alley, shall vest in the rightful proprietor of that part.”

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 560.227a(1) — 2 cases

2000 Baum Fam. Trust v. Babel, 793 N.W.2d 633 (Mich. 2010). “” MCL 560.227a. In light of these principles, to decide that front-lot plaintiffs are not to be deemed riparian because they do not own the soil, as they would if the road were an easement, would be a distortion of well-established law recognizing that plaintiffs and similarly…”

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 560.227a(2) — 4 cases

Prismatic Found. v. Eliot Street LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). “See MCL 560.227a(2). After the Red Cross completed its development, the Club members began regularly using the Red Cross’s parking lot unimpeded and traversed by foot from the parking lot along the concrete walkway to enter the Club.”

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.