Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.3840 (2026)

Delivery of premises to owner; conditions; bond; abatement; liability of sureties; appeal; stay of order of abatement.

✓ 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


600.3840 Delivery of premises to owner; conditions; bond; abatement; liability of sureties; appeal; stay of order of abatement.

Sec. 3840.

    (1) If the owner of such building or place pays all costs of the proceeding, and files a bond with sureties approved by the circuit judge, in the penal sum of not less than $1,000.00 nor more than $50,000.00, conditioned that he will immediately abate the nuisance and prevent the same from being established or kept therein within a period of 1 year from the date of the judgment, the court may order such premises to be delivered to the owner and if the bond is given and costs therein paid before order of abatement, the action shall be thereby abated as to that building only.

    (2) If it appears to the court that the conditions of the bond have been violated, the principal and sureties thereon are liable thereon for the full penalty of the bond in an action brought in the name of the state of Michigan, or upon motion in the action in which the bond was given.

    (3) Should the defendants, or any of them, appeal to the supreme court from the order and judgment rendered, the injunction or order of abatement shall not be stayed pending the appeal, except that stay may be granted or the order of abatement may be modified pending such appeal upon the written order of 2 justices of the supreme court.

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

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1977–2005 · leading case: State Ex Rel Macomb Cnty. Prosecuting Attorney v. Mesk, 333 N.W.2d 184 (Mich. Ct. App. 1983).
State Ex Rel Macomb Cnty. Prosecuting Attorney v. Mesk, 333 N.W.2d 184 (Mich. Ct. App. 1983). “The owner’s remedy is to recover damages from the lessee or, at the discretion of the trial court, to take advantage of the protections afforded by MCL 600.3840; MSA 27A.3840.”
State Ex Rel Oakland Prosecuting Attorney v. Weaver, 254 N.W.2d 68 (Mich. Ct. App. 1977). “1 MCLA 600.3840; MSA 27A.3840 expressly prevents an oppressive forfeiture by allowing mitigation for an innocent owner.”
State ex rel. Karl F. Dean v. George L. VanHorn (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). “120 (2002); Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 600.3840 (1) (2000); Minn.”
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.