Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.4401
Action for mandamus against state officer; commencement; rule for joinder of claims or consolidation of actions; rule for referral of action to circuit court.
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
600.4401 Action for mandamus against state officer; commencement; rule for joinder of claims or consolidation of actions; rule for referral of action to circuit court.
Sec. 4401.
(1) An action for mandamus against a state officer shall be commenced in the court of appeals, or in the circuit court in the county in which venue is proper or in Ingham county, at the option of the party commencing the action.
(2) The supreme court may provide by rule for the joinder of claims or consolidation of actions in the court of appeals or the circuit court if those claims or actions include a prayer for mandamus against a state officer and arise out of the same circumstances or raise a similar issue of law.
(3) The supreme court may provide by rule for the referral of an action from the court of appeals to the circuit court to determine and report its findings of fact or to hear and decide the action if substantial fact finding is necessary to determine the applicability of mandamus relief.
History: 1961, Act 236, Eff. Jan. 1, 1963 ;-- Am. 1967, Act 65, Imd. Eff. June 20, 1967 ;-- Am. 1976, Act 317, Eff. Jan. 1, 1977
Compiler's Notes:
Section 2 of Act 317 of 1976 provides: “As provided by the rule of the supreme court, this amendatory act may apply to actions pending on January 1, 1977.”
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 52
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1963–2025 · leading case: O’connell v. Director of Elections
O’connell v. Director of Elections (2016)
“On the contrary, be *106 cause the Constitution also grants the Supreme Court power over prerogative writs, and because this Court has jurisdiction over prerogative writs pursuant to MCL 600.4401 and Const 1963, art 6, § 10, the circuit court’s jurisdiction over such writs is…”
Prime Time International Distributing Inc v. Dept of Treasury (2017)
“In O'Connell , we analyzed the relationship between MCL 600.4401 and MCL 600.6419 to determine which court has jurisdiction to decide writs of mandamus.”
Waterford School District v. State Board of Education (1980)
“Therefore, the mandate of MCL 600.4401; MSA 27A.4401, must take precedence over GCR 1963, 714.”
Teasel v. Department of Mental Health (1984)
“601, MCL 600.4401; MSA 27A.4401. It is beyond dispute that the constitutional authority of circuit courts includes the common-law power to issue writs of mandamus.”
People v. Young (1997)
“§ 600.4401(1); M.S.A. § 27A.4401(1) provides that an action for mandamus against a state officer shall be brought in the Court of Appeals, in the circuit court in the county in which venue is proper, or in Ingham County, at the option of the party bringing the action.”
Musselman v. Governor of Michigan (1993)
“Having stated the positions of the parties, we must determine whether we have the power to grant plaintiffs' request for relief.”
Silverman v. University of Michigan Board of Regents (1994)
“[MCL 600.4401(1); MSA 27A.4401(1).] An action for mandamus against a state officer may be brought in the Court of Appeals or the circuit court.”
Citizens Protecting Michigan's Constitution v. Secretary of State (2008)
“Plaintiffs further claim that the RMGN initiative petition is not eligible to be placed on the ballot because it offers more than a single amendment with a single purpose. III. ANALYSIS A. JURISDICTION This Court has original jurisdiction to entertain an action for “mandamus…”
Superx Drugs Corp. v. State Board of Pharmacy (1963)
“" PA 1961, No 236, § 4401 (CLS 1961, § 600.4401, Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 27A.4401).”
Citizens Protecting Michigan's Constitution v. Secretary of State (2018)
“MANDAMUS This Court has jurisdiction over this original action pursuant to MCL 600.4401(1) ("An action for mandamus against a state officer shall be commenced in the court of appeals .”
Citizens for Protection of Marriage v. Board of State Canvassers (2004)
“203(C)(2); Comm for Constitutional Reform v Secretary of State, 425 Mich 336 , 338 n 2; 389 NW2d 430 (1986); see also MCL 600.4401 (allowing a party to commence a mandamus action in the Court of Appeals).”
Bisco’s, Inc v. Liquor Control Commission (1976)
“MCLA 600.4401; MSA 27A.4401; GCR 1963, 714.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.4401(1) — 17 cases
O’connell v. Director of Elections (2016)
“On the contrary, be *106 cause the Constitution also grants the Supreme Court power over prerogative writs, and because this Court has jurisdiction over prerogative writs pursuant to MCL 600.4401 and Const 1963, art 6, § 10, the circuit court’s jurisdiction over such writs is…”
Prime Time International Distributing Inc v. Dept of Treasury (2017)
“In O'Connell , we analyzed the relationship between MCL 600.4401 and MCL 600.6419 to determine which court has jurisdiction to decide writs of mandamus.”
Waterford School District v. State Board of Education (1980)
“Therefore, the mandate of MCL 600.4401; MSA 27A.4401, must take precedence over GCR 1963, 714.”
People v. Young (1997)
“§ 600.4401(1); M.S.A. § 27A.4401(1) provides that an action for mandamus against a state officer shall be brought in the Court of Appeals, in the circuit court in the county in which venue is proper, or in Ingham County, at the option of the party bringing the action.”
Musselman v. Governor of Michigan (1993)
“Having stated the positions of the parties, we must determine whether we have the power to grant plaintiffs' request for relief.”
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.