MARKETABLE RECORD TITLE
Act 200 of 1945
565.103 Marketable record title; successors in interest; notice of claims; recording for record.
Sec. 3.
(1) Except as otherwise provided in section 4, marketable record title is held by a person and is taken by the person's successors in interest free and clear of any and all interests, claims, and charges the existence of which depends in whole or in part on any act, transaction, event, or omission that occurred before the 20-year period for mineral interests, and the 40-year period for other interests, and all such interests, claims, and charges are void and of no effect at law or in equity. However, an interest, claim, or charge may be preserved and kept effective by recording not later than 2 years after the effective date of the amendatory act that added section 5a or during the 20-year period for mineral interests or the 40-year period for other interests a notice of claim that satisfies the requirements of section 5. However, unless the interest is excepted under section 4, an interest, claim, or charge that became void and of no effect under this subsection before March 29, 2019 or that expires or terminates based on its own terms is not effective and is not preserved by recording a notice of claim under this subsection.
(2) A disability or lack of knowledge of any kind on the part of anyone does not suspend the running of the 20-year period for mineral interests or the 40-year period for other interests.
(3) For the purpose of recording notices of claim for homestead interests, the date from which the 20-year period for mineral interests and the 40-year period for other interests run is the date of recording of the instrument that contains the basis for the claim.
(4) A notice under this section may be recorded by any of the following:
(a) The claimant.
(b) Any other person acting on behalf of a claimant as an agent or as authorized in writing.
(c) A property owners' association.
(d) Any other person acting on behalf of any claimant if 1 or more of the following conditions exist:
(i) The claimant is under a disability.
(ii) The claimant is unable to assert a claim on the claimant's own behalf.
(iii) The claimant is 1 of a class but whose identity cannot be established or is uncertain at the time of recording the notice of claim.
(5) The recording of a notice of claim under this section by a claimant that meets all the requirements of this act to preserve the claimant's rights in the land is an effective notice under this section for all other persons whose rights originate from the same instrument as the claimant's.
History: 1945, Act 200, Eff. Sept. 6, 1945 ;-- CL 1948, 565.103 ;-- Am. 1997, Act 154, Imd. Eff. Dec. 22, 1997 ;-- Am. 2018, Act 572, Eff. Mar. 29, 2019 ;-- Am. 2020, Act 294, Imd. Eff. Dec. 29, 2020 ;-- Am. 2024, Act 20, Imd. Eff. Mar. 28, 2024 ;-- Am. 2025, Act 13, Imd. Eff. Sept. 29, 2025
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
10
cases (
4 in the last 5 years), 1988–2025 · leading case:
Fowler v. Doan, 683 N.W.2d 682 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
Fowler v. Doan, 683 N.W.2d 682 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 4× “MCL 565.103 further provides, in part: Marketable title shall be held by a person and shall be taken by his or her successors in interest free and clear of any and all interests, claims, and charges whatsoever the existence of which depends in whole or in part upon any act,…”
Cipriano v. Tocco, 757 F. Supp. 1484 (E.D. Mich. 1991).
· cites it 10× “A memorandum of land contract may be considered a claim against land under MCL 565.103; MSA 26.1273. Thus, the memorandum of land contract is entitled to be recorded by the register of deeds in the county where the land is located.”
Dep't of Nat. Resources v. Carmody-Lahti Real Est., Inc, 699 N.W.2d 272 (Mich. 2005).
· cites it 2× “Moreover, the easement holder in Strong filed notice of its easement under the marketable record title act, MCL 565.103. This filing "indicated that [the easement holder] intended to preserve its interest.”
Fowler v. Doan, 683 N.W.2d 682 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 4× “MCL 565.103 further provides, in part: Marketable title shall be held by a person and shall be taken by his or her successors in interest free and clear of any and all interests, claims, and charges whatsoever the existence of which depends in whole or in part upon any act,…”
Strong v. Detroit & MacKinac Ry. Co., 423 N.W.2d 266 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988).
“Under § 3 of the marketable record title act, MCL 565.103; MSA 26.1273, d&m’s interest in plaintiffs’ forty-acre parcel, conveyed to it in 1901, was extinguished unless within the forty-year period prior to plaintiffs’ purchase d&m recorded a *567 notice of its interest.”
Gregory James Berg v. Fox Point Beach Ass'n Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
· cites it 3× “This is not accurate, as there is no indication that the Association has filed the appropriate notice under MCL 565.103. Absent any evidence that the Association filed the proper notice, the MRTA operates to extinguish the use restriction at issue.”
David W Underwood v. Walloon Lake Country Club (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
“The MRTA does not bar or extinguish any easement or interest in the nature of an easement, or any rights appurtenant thereto granted, excepted or reserved by a recorded instrument creating such easement or interest, including any rights for future use, if the existence of such…”
Silas Salyer v. Est. of Evelyn Walker (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
“108; see also MCL 565.103 and MCL 565.105. Walker 3 Because the court properly granted summary disposition pursuant to MCR 2.”
Bh Rentals LLC v. Sand Hill Cmty. LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
“Because BH Rentals filed a notice of claim under MCL 565.103(1), it preserved whatever interest in an easement it had against the application of the MRTA.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 565.103(1) — 2 cases
Gregory James Berg v. Fox Point Beach Ass'n Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
“This is not accurate, as there is no indication that the Association has filed the appropriate notice under MCL 565.103. Absent any evidence that the Association filed the proper notice, the MRTA operates to extinguish the use restriction at issue.”
Bh Rentals LLC v. Sand Hill Cmty. LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
“Because BH Rentals filed a notice of claim under MCL 565.103(1), it preserved whatever interest in an easement it had against the application of the MRTA.”
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.