Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.5866 (2026)

Revival of barred claim; written acknowledgment of obligor.

✓ 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


600.5866 Revival of barred claim; written acknowledgment of obligor.

Sec. 5866.

    Express or implied contracts which have been barred by the running of the period of limitation shall be revived by the acknowledgment or promise of the party to be charged. But no acknowledgment or promise shall be recognized as effective to bar the running of the period of limitations or revive the claim unless the acknowledgment is made by or the promise is contained in some writing signed by the party to be charged by the action.

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

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1982–2023 · leading case: Adams v. City of Detroit, 591 N.W.2d 67 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998).
Adams v. City of Detroit, 591 N.W.2d 67 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 3× “REVIVAL OF CLAIMS UNDER MCL 600.5866; MSA 27A.5866 In November 1991, defendant’s agent issued a memorandum addressed to the staff of defendant’s retirement system announcing that, in light of Clexton , *707 defendant’s policy was that vested retirees “who resigned prior to July…”
Morganroth & Morganroth v. DeLorean, 123 F.3d 374 (6th Cir. 1997). “2d 655, 659 (1982); Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.5866 ; and (iv) DeLorean and Logan voluntarily made payments to Morganroth, see Beaupre v.”
Charbonneau v. Mary Jane Elliott, P.C., 611 F. Supp. 2d 736 (E.D. Mich. 2009). · cites it 2× “Pursuant to MCL § 600.5866 an acknowledgment contained in a writing can revive a debt that has been barred by the statute of limitations.”
In Re Easterbrook Est., 319 N.W.2d 655 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982). “” MCL 600.5866; MSA 27A.5866. We have examined the remaining arguments made by claimant in this appeal and are convinced that none of them requires reversal.”
LePine v. Rosenbaum (E.D. Mich. 2020). · cites it 20× “Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.5866 . The statute provides: Express or implied contracts which have been barred by the running of the period of limitation shall be revived by the acknowledgment or promise of the party to be charged.”
Adams v. City of Detroit, 591 N.W.2d 67 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 3× “MCL 600.5866; MSA 27A.5866 provides as follows: Express or implied contracts which have been barred by the running of the period of limitation shall be revived by the acknowledgment or promise of the party to be charged.”
Future Now Enter., Inc. v. John Foster, 525 F. App'x 395 (6th Cir. 2013). “Additionally, Cim-mer never raised the revival by acknowledgment argument under Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.5866 before the district court.”
Muzaffar H Lakhani v. City of Inkster (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “-3- Plaintiff argues, however, that MCL 600.5866 revived his claim with respect to the severance payments.”
Muzaffar H Lakhani v. City of Inkster (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “-3- Plaintiff argues, however, that MCL 600.5866 revived his claim with respect to the severance payments.”
Triple A Int'l, Inc. v. Democratic Repub. of the Congo, 852 F. Supp. 2d 839 (E.D. Mich. 2012). · cites it 2× “See Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.5866 (providing for the revival of an otherwise time-barred breach-of-contract claim through “the acknowledgment or promise of the party to be charged”).”
Dolores R Yanover Revocable Trust v. Betty Sue Hancock (Mich. Ct. App. 2022). “3 MCL 600.5866 states: “Express or implied contracts which have been barred by the running of the period of limitation shall be revived by the acknowledgment or promise of the party to be charged.”
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.