Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 600 / Act 236 of 1961
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.102 (2026)

Construction of act.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

REVISED JUDICATURE ACT OF 1961


Act 236 of 1961


600.102 Construction of act.

Sec. 102.

    This act is remedial in character, and shall be liberally construed to effectuate the intents and purposes thereof.

History: 1961, Act 236, Eff. Jan. 1, 1963

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases, 1964–2017 · leading case: Denham v. Bedford, 287 N.W.2d 168 (Mich. 1980).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Denham v. Bedford, 287 N.W.2d 168 (Mich. 1980). · cites it 2× “Section 102 of the RJA specifically enunciates the construction which should be applied to provisions of that act: "This act is remedial in character, and shall be liberally construed to effectuate the intents and purposes thereof.”
Sam v. Balardo, 308 N.W.2d 142 (Mich. 1981). · cites it 2× “[18] MCL 600.102; MSA 27A.102 provides: "This act is remedial in character, and shall be liberally construed to effectuate the intents and purposes thereof.”
Old Orchard by the Bay Assocs. v. Hamilton Mut. Ins., 454 N.W.2d 73 (Mich. 1990). · cites it 2× “VII Given the broad statutory definition of a "civil action" in Michigan, and given the parties stipulation to arbitrate made in the context of a properly filed lawsuit, we conclude that the judgment in favor of plaintiff was made pursuant to a "civil action.”
Wood v. Detroit Edison Co., 294 N.W.2d 571 (Mich. 1980). · cites it 2× “It would be implausible to conclude that the Legislature intended, by use of this same ambiguous language, to allow evidence of remarriage and at the same time overturn precedent of this Court. Finally, the wrongful death act is part of the Revised Judicature Act.”
H J Tucker & Assocs., Inc. v. Allied Chucker & Eng'g Co., 595 N.W.2d 176 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999). “102, and considering our agreement with the holding and analysis of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals on this issue, we conclude that the trial court did not err in determining that § 2961 does not violate the Title-Object Clause of the Michigan Constitution. n Defendant argues…”
Nippa v. Botsford Gen. Hosp., 651 N.W.2d 103 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “MCL 600.102; H J Tucker & Associates, Inc.”
Am. Anodco, Inc. v. Reynolds Metals Co., 572 F. Supp. 895 (W.D. Mich. 1983). “§ 600.102; Denham v. Bedford, 407 Mich. 517 , 287 N.”
Woods v. Edgewater Amusement Park, 165 N.W.2d 12 (Mich. 1969). “” CLS 1961, § 600.102 (Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 27A.102). *571 This Court, in repeating CLS 1961, § 600.”
Stadel v. Granger Bros., Inc., 144 N.W.2d 609 (Mich. Ct. App. 1966). “” Revised judicature act, PA 1961, No 236, § 102 (CLS 1961, § 600.102, Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 27A.102). The liberal construction given by the courts to arbitration clauses entered into prior to the revised judicature act and the general court rules of 1963 is exemplified by Norton…”
Young v. Michigan, 429 N.W.2d 642 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988). “MCL 600.102; MSA 27A.102 states: This act [the rja] is remedial in character, and shall be liberally construed to effectuate the intents and purposes thereof.”
Babcock v. Gold, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20863 (D.V.I. 1990). “Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.102 (1989). See American Anodco, Inc.”
Twomley v. Arnold, 125 N.W.2d 860 (Mich. 1964). “RJA, PA 1961, No 236, § 102 (CL8 1961, § 600.102 [Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 27A.102]), does provide that the act is remedial in character and shall be liberally construed to effect the intents and purposes thereof.”
Show all 17 citing cases →
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.