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

Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.4505 (2026)

Usurpation of office; determination; judgment for relator; proceedings.

✓ 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


600.4505 Usurpation of office; determination; judgment for relator; proceedings.

Sec. 4505.

    (1) In actions brought against persons for usurpation of office, the judgment may determine the right of the defendant to hold the office. If a party plaintiff alleges that he is entitled to the office, the court may decide which of the parties is entitled to hold the office.

    (2) If judgment is rendered in favor of a party who is averred to be entitled to the office, he is entitled, after taking the oath of office, and executing any official bond which is required by law, to take the office. Such party shall be given all the books and papers in the custody of the defendant, or within his power, belonging to the office.

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

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 2008–2024 · leading case: In Re Servaas, 774 N.W.2d 46 (Mich. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re Servaas, 774 N.W.2d 46 (Mich. 2009). · cites it 12× “[11] This observation is supported by MCL 600.4505, which describes the nature of a quo warranto action: (1) In actions brought against persons for usurpation of office, the judgment may determine the right of the defendant to hold the office.”
Davis v. Chatman, 276 Educ. L. Rep. 973 (Mich. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 5× “302, part of the Revised School Code, provides the requirements to run for a position on a school board: “An individual is eligible for election as a school board member if the individual is a citizen of the United States and is a qualified and registered elector of the school…”
Barrow v. Detroit Mayor, 802 N.W.2d 658 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 7× “Appellant asserts that he proceeded under MCL 600.4505 and alleged usurpation due to the massive number of irregularities (i.”
Hanlin v. Saugatuck Twp., 829 N.W.2d 335 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013). “Generally such actions are brought pursuant to MCL 600.4505 — which echoes the procedure of MCR 3.”
Risk v. Lincoln Charter Twp. Bd. of Trs., 760 N.W.2d 510 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008). “It is a traditional quo warranto action to the extent that it was brought to try title to the offices of Lincoln Charter Township park commissioner and to challenge the individual defendants’ intrusion into and usurpation of those offices.”
Attorney Gen. v. Clarke, 803 N.W.2d 130 (Mich. 2011). · cites it 2× “In November 2004, Judge AMY KRAUSE of the 54-A District Court was elected to a six-year term of office beginning on January 1, 2005. In November 2010, Judge KRAUSE was reelected to another six-year term that was to begin on January 1, 2011.”
Robert Davis v. Cnty. of Wayne (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 3× “4545 did not apply to an action to try title to a specific office, and plaintiff lacked standing to bring an action under MCL 600.4505 because he was not a losing candidate.”
Gary Boike v. Patrick Green (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 3× ““An action under MCL 600.4505 is appropriate when the plaintiff seeks to challenge the defendant’s right to hold office, but fraud or error is not alleged.”
Gary Boike v. Patrick Green (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 3× ““An action under MCL 600.4505 is appropriate when the plaintiff seeks to challenge the defendant’s right to hold office, but fraud or error is not alleged.”
Angelic Johnson v. Sec'y of State (Mich. 2020). · cites it 2× “” MCL 600.4505. But these actions usually must be brought by the attorney general—only if she refuses can a private citizen seek leave of court to make the claim.”
William Bailey v. Cnty. of Antrim (Mich. Ct. App. 2022). “Generally such actions are brought pursuant to MCL 600.4505—which echoes the procedure of MCR 3.”
20241122_C371299_39_371299.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2024). “MCL 600.4501(1). The Legislature recognized that an action for quo warranto normally applies to determine who holds title to public office, a public franchise, or a public privilege.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.4505(1) — 6 cases
In Re Servaas, 774 N.W.2d 46 (Mich. 2009). “[11] This observation is supported by MCL 600.4505, which describes the nature of a quo warranto action: (1) In actions brought against persons for usurpation of office, the judgment may determine the right of the defendant to hold the office.”
Davis v. Chatman, 276 Educ. L. Rep. 973 (Mich. Ct. App. 2011). “302, part of the Revised School Code, provides the requirements to run for a position on a school board: “An individual is eligible for election as a school board member if the individual is a citizen of the United States and is a qualified and registered elector of the school…”
Attorney Gen. v. Clarke, 803 N.W.2d 130 (Mich. 2011). “In November 2004, Judge AMY KRAUSE of the 54-A District Court was elected to a six-year term of office beginning on January 1, 2005. In November 2010, Judge KRAUSE was reelected to another six-year term that was to begin on January 1, 2011.”
Angelic Johnson v. Sec'y of State (Mich. 2020). “” MCL 600.4505. But these actions usually must be brought by the attorney general—only if she refuses can a private citizen seek leave of court to make the claim.”
Gary Boike v. Patrick Green (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). ““An action under MCL 600.4505 is appropriate when the plaintiff seeks to challenge the defendant’s right to hold office, but fraud or error is not alleged.”
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.