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

Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.2927 (2026)

Mortgaged property; nonpayment of taxes or insurance as waste; appointment of receiver; conditions.

✓ 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


600.2927 Mortgaged property; nonpayment of taxes or insurance as waste; appointment of receiver; conditions.

Sec. 2927.

    (1) The parties to any mortgage, trust mortgage, or deed of trust of real property, or any extension thereof, may, by agreement herein contained to that effect, provide that the failure of the mortgagor or grantor, as the case may be, to pay any taxes assessed against such property or installments thereof, in the event said taxes are being paid under the provisions of Act No. 126 of the Public Acts of 1933, as amended, or any insurance premium upon policies covering any property located upon such premises constitutes waste.

    (2) If such mortgagor or grantor in such instrument fails to pay such taxes or insurance premiums upon property subject to the terms of a mortgage, trust mortgage, or deed of trust containing such agreement the circuit court having jurisdiction of such property may, in its discretion upon complaint or motion filed by such mortgagee, grantee, assignee thereof or trustee under such instrument and upon such notice as the court may require, appoint a receiver of the property for the purpose of preventing such waste. Subject to the order of the court, the receiver may collect the rents and income from such property and shall exercise such control over such property as to such court may seem proper.

    (3) No receiver may be appointed under the provisions of this section for any dwelling house or farm occupied by any owner thereof as his home or farm. No receiver may be appointed under the provisions of this section for any store or other business property having an assessed valuation of $7,500.00 or less.

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

Compiler's Notes:

    Act 126 of 1933, referred to in this section, was repealed by Act 150 of 1980.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1981–2025 · leading case: Kubczak v. Chem. Bank & Trust Co., 575 N.W.2d 745 (Mich. 1998).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kubczak v. Chem. Bank & Trust Co., 575 N.W.2d 745 (Mich. 1998). · cites it 2× “§ 600.2927; M.S.A. § 27A.2927, M.C.L. § 600.”
Packard Square, LLC v. Can IV Packard Square LLC (In re Packard Square, LLC), 586 B.R. 853 (E.D. Mich. 2018). “In this circumstance, MCL 600.2927 as well as the provisions of the Loan Documents authorize this Court to appoint a receiver.”
In re Packard Square LLC, 575 B.R. 768 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2017). “In this circumstance, MCL 600.2927 as well as the provisions of the Loan Documents authorize this Court to appoint a receiver.”
Petitpren v. Taylor Sch. Dist., 304 N.W.2d 553 (Mich. Ct. App. 1981). “g, MCL 600.2927(2); MSA 27A.2927(2), MCL 600.”
Wayne Cnty. Jail Inmates v. Wayne Cnty. Chief Exec. Officer, 444 N.W.2d 549 (Mich. Ct. App. 1989). “9 "We may doubtless inquire in this proceeding whether the court in appointing a receiver was wholly without jurisdiction.”
Colby v. Tobba, Inc, 381 N.W.2d 411 (Mich. Ct. App. 1985). “2926; MCL 600.2927; MSA 27A.2927. We decline defendant’s invitation to create a rule which would require vendors to refuse all payments from a court-appointed receiver.”
In re Packard Square LLC, 574 B.R. 107 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2017). “In this circumstance, MCL 600.2927 as well as the provisions of the Loan Documents authorize this Court to appoint a receiver.”
Frederick L Kubik Revocable Trust v. the Home Apts. LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 3× “They contend that the circumstances did not warrant or justify appointment of a receiver. We disagree.2 The trial court properly exercised its discretion in appointing a receiver.”
Frederick L Kubik Revocable Trust v. the Home Apts. LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 3× “They contend that the circumstances did not warrant or justify appointment of a receiver. We disagree.2 The trial court properly exercised its discretion in appointing a receiver.”
Comerica Bank v. Holy Hope Heritage Baptist Church (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “2926, MCL 600.2927, MCR 2.621, and MCR 2.622. Comerica and Kohut then filed a joint motion for entry of an order authorizing the sale of Holy Hope’s real and personal property to Redeemed Christian Fellowship Ministries for $125,000, the proceeds of which would be disbursed to…”
City of Southfield v. Shefa LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2022). “With respect to the claims raised by the city, there is no serious question whether, absent the bankruptcy proceedings, the circuit court has subject-matter jurisdiction over the claims—it does. Generally speaking, claims of breach of a mortgage agreement, nuisance, and…”
Huntington Nat'l Bank, The v. Pere Marquette Builders, L.L.C. (W.D. Mich. 2024). “LAWS § 600.2927(1) (“The parties to any mortgage … may, by agreement therein contained to that effect, provide that the failure of the mortgagor or grantor, as the case may be, to pay any taxes assessed against such property or installments thereof … constitutes waste.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.2927(1) — 1 case
Huntington Nat'l Bank, The v. Pere Marquette Builders, L.L.C. (W.D. Mich. 2024). “LAWS § 600.2927(1) (“The parties to any mortgage … may, by agreement therein contained to that effect, provide that the failure of the mortgagor or grantor, as the case may be, to pay any taxes assessed against such property or installments thereof … constitutes waste.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.2927(2) — 4 cases
Petitpren v. Taylor Sch. Dist., 304 N.W.2d 553 (Mich. Ct. App. 1981). “g, MCL 600.2927(2); MSA 27A.2927(2), MCL 600.”
Wayne Cnty. Jail Inmates v. Wayne Cnty. Chief Exec. Officer, 444 N.W.2d 549 (Mich. Ct. App. 1989). “9 "We may doubtless inquire in this proceeding whether the court in appointing a receiver was wholly without jurisdiction.”
Frederick L Kubik Revocable Trust v. the Home Apts. LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “They contend that the circumstances did not warrant or justify appointment of a receiver. We disagree.2 The trial court properly exercised its discretion in appointing a receiver.”
Frederick L Kubik Revocable Trust v. the Home Apts. LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “They contend that the circumstances did not warrant or justify appointment of a receiver. We disagree.2 The trial court properly exercised its discretion in appointing a receiver.”
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.