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

Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023 (2026)

Property exempt from levy and sale under execution; lien excluded from exemption; homestead exemption; rents and profits.

✓ 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


600.6023 Property exempt from levy and sale under execution; lien excluded from exemption; homestead exemption; rents and profits.

Sec. 6023.

    (1) The following property of a judgment debtor and the judgment debtor's dependents is exempt from levy and sale under an execution:

    (a) All family pictures, all arms and accouterments required by law to be kept by any person, all wearing apparel of every person and his or her family, and provisions and fuel for comfortable subsistence of each householder and his or her family for 6 months.

    (b) All household goods, furniture, utensils, books, and appliances, not exceeding in value $1,000.00.

    (c) A seat, pew, or slip occupied by the judgment debtor or the judgment debtor's family in a house or place of public worship, and all cemeteries, tombs, and rights of burial while in use as repositories of the dead of the judgment debtor's family or kept for burial of the judgment debtor.

    (d) To each householder, 10 sheep, 2 cows, 5 swine, 100 hens, 5 roosters, and a sufficient quantity of hay and grain, growing or otherwise, for properly keeping the animals and poultry for 6 months.

    (e) The tools, implements, materials, stock, apparatus, team, vehicle, motor vehicle, horses, harness, or other things to enable a person to carry on the profession, trade, occupation, or business in which the person is principally engaged, not exceeding in value $1,000.00.

    (f) Any money or other benefits paid, provided, or allowed to be paid, provided, or allowed, by any stock or mutual life or health or casualty insurance company, on account of the disability due to injury or sickness of the insured person, whether the debt or liability of such insured person or beneficiary was incurred before or after the accrual of benefits under the insurance policy or contract, except that the exemption under this subdivision does not apply to actions to recover for necessities contracted for after the accrual of the benefits.

    (g) A homestead of not more than 40 acres of land and the dwelling house and appurtenances on that homestead that is not included in a recorded plat, city, or village, or, at the option of the owner, a quantity of land that consists of not more than 1 lot that is within a recorded town plat, city, or village, and the dwelling house and appurtenances on that land, owned and occupied by any resident of this state, not exceeding in value $3,500.00. This exemption applies to any house that is owned, occupied, and claimed as a homestead by a person but that is on land not owned by the person. However, this exemption does not apply to a mortgage on the homestead that is lawfully obtained. A mortgage is not valid for purposes of this subdivision without the signature of a married judgment debtor's spouse unless either of the following occurs:

    (i) The mortgage is given to secure the payment of the purchase money or a portion of the purchase money.

    (ii) The mortgage is recorded in the office of the register of deeds of the county in which the property is located, for a period of 25 years, and no notice of a claim of invalidity is filed in that office during the 25 years following the recording of the mortgage.

    (h) An equity of redemption as described in section 6060.

    (i) The homestead of a family, after the death of the owner of the homestead, from the payment of his or her debts in all cases during the minority of his or her children.

    (j) An individual retirement account or individual retirement annuity as defined in section 408 or 408a of the internal revenue code of 1986, 26 USC 408 and 408a, and the payments or distributions from the account or annuity. This exemption applies to the operation of the federal bankruptcy code as permitted by section 522(b)(2) of the bankruptcy code, 11 USC 522. This exemption does not apply to any amounts contributed to the individual retirement account or individual retirement annuity if the contribution occurs within 120 days before the debtor files for bankruptcy. This exemption does not apply to an individual retirement account or individual retirement annuity to the extent that any of the following occur:

    (i) The individual retirement account or individual retirement annuity is subject to an order of a court pursuant to a judgment of divorce or separate maintenance.

    (ii) The individual retirement account or individual retirement annuity is subject to an order of a court concerning child support.

    (iii) Contributions to the individual retirement account or premiums on the individual retirement annuity, including the earnings or benefits from those contributions or premiums, exceed, in the tax year made or paid, the deductible amount allowed under section 408 of the internal revenue code of 1986, 26 USC 408. This limitation on contributions does not apply to a rollover of a pension, profit-sharing, stock bonus, or other plan that is qualified under section 401 of the internal revenue code of 1986, 26 USC 401, or an annuity contract under section 403(b) of the internal revenue code of 1986, 26 USC 403.

    (k) The right or interest of a person in a pension, profit-sharing, stock bonus, or other plan that is qualified under section 401 of the internal revenue code of 1986, 26 USC 401, or an annuity contract under section 403(b) of the internal revenue code of 1986, 26 USC 403, if the plan or annuity is subject to the employee retirement income security act of 1974, Public Law 93-406, 88 Stat. 829. This exemption applies to the operation of the federal bankruptcy code, as permitted by section 522(b)(2) of the bankruptcy code, 11 USC 522. This exemption does not apply to any amount contributed to a pension, profit-sharing, stock bonus, or other qualified plan or a 403(b) annuity if the contribution occurs within 120 days before the debtor files for bankruptcy. This exemption does not apply to the right or interest of a person in a pension, profit-sharing, stock bonus, or other qualified plan or a 403(b) annuity to the extent that the right or interest in the plan or annuity is subject to either of the following:

    (i) An order of a court pursuant to a judgment of divorce or separate maintenance.

    (ii) An order of a court concerning child support.

    (l) Any interest in the following:

    (i) A trust, fund, or advance tuition payment contract established under the Michigan education trust act, 1986 PA 316, MCL 390.1421 to 390.1442.

    (ii) An account established under the Michigan education savings program act, 2000 PA 161, MCL 390.1471 to 390.1486.

    (iii) An account in a qualified tuition program or educational savings trust under section 529 or 530 of the internal revenue code of 1986, 26 USC 529 and 530.

    (2) The exemptions provided in this section do not extend to any lien on the exempt property that is excluded from exemption by law.

    (3) If the owner of a homestead dies, leaving a surviving spouse but no children, the homestead is exempt, and the rents and profits of the homestead shall accrue to the benefit of the surviving spouse before his or her remarriage, unless the surviving spouse is the owner of a homestead in his or her own right.

History: 1961, Act 236, Eff. Jan. 1, 1963 ;-- Am. 1963, 2nd Ex. Sess., Act 40, Imd. Eff. Dec. 27, 1963 ;-- Am. 1964, Act 73, Imd. Eff. May 12, 1964 ;-- Am. 1984, Act 83, Imd. Eff. Apr. 19, 1984 ;-- Am. 1989, Act 5, Imd. Eff. Apr. 19, 1989 ;-- Am. 1998, Act 61, Imd. Eff. Apr. 20, 1998 ;-- Am. 2012, Act 553, Imd. Eff. Jan. 2, 2013

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 64 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1971–2025 · leading case: In Re Zott, 225 B.R. 160 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1998).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re Zott, 225 B.R. 160 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1998). · cites it 21× “Creditor claims that by allowing Debtors to use § 600.6023 to satisfy 541(c)(2), and then allowing Debtors to use the federal exemptions provided under 522(d)(10)(E), Debtors are availing themselves of both state and federal exemptions, which is not allowed under the Code.”
In Re Spradlin, 231 B.R. 254 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1999). · cites it 28× “§ 600.6023 as a whole indicates that when the legislature intended to allow the exemption of more than one item within a category of exemption, it did so by employing the words ‘all,’ ‘any,’ or a numerical denomination such as ‘ten.”
In Re Johnson, 439 B.R. 416 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2010). · cites it 13× “Bankruptcy Judge Graves determined that Debtor’s disability payments under the Plan are exempt under Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 600.6023 (l)(f), and on appeal the district court observed that the disability payments “would facially appear to fall *443 within the scope of’ this…”
Lasich v. Est. of Wickstrom (In Re Wickstrom), 113 B.R. 339 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 1990). · cites it 6× “The Michigan exemption statute in effect as of the bankruptcy filing date was Mich.Comp.Laws Ann. § 600.6023(a)(6) which states as follows: Sec.”
In Re Spears, 308 B.R. 793 (W.D. Mich. 2004). · cites it 13× “” 4 She also relies upon Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 600.6023 (l)(h) as a basis for the exemption of her interest in this property.”
State Treasurer v. Schuster, 572 N.W.2d 628 (Mich. 1998). · cites it 4× “§ 600.6023; M.S.A. § 27A.6023, which governed the general relationship between debtor and creditor.”
State Treasurer v. Gardner, 564 N.W.2d 51 (Mich. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 12× “§ 600.6023; M.S.A. § 27A.6023, which exempts property from levy and sale, precludes execution on his disability pension.”
In Re Wallace, 347 B.R. 626 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 2006). · cites it 4× “Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023 . Mich. Comp.”
In Re Alan Wayne Raynard, 327 B.R. 623 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 2005). · cites it 4× “See, Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023 . 25 . The Raynards did not specifically claim this exemption although it clearly was available to them under Section 522(b)(1).”
Richardson v. Schafer (In Re Schafer), 455 B.R. 590 (6th Cir. BAP 2011). · cites it 3× “Since January 3, 2005, Michigan debtors who choose to take exemptions enacted by the state legislature have had the choice of two different state exemption statutes, a statute available to all Michigan residents ( Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023 ), and a statute available only to…”
Richardson v. Schafer (In Re Schafer), 689 F.3d 601 (6th Cir. 2012). · cites it 2× “§ 522 (d), from a set of general exemptions available to all Michigan residents irrespective of their bankruptcy status, Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023 , or from a list of exemptions available solely to debtors in bankruptcy, Mich.”
In re Demeter, 478 B.R. 281 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2012). · cites it 3× “Michigan has a statute that grants specified exemptions for debtors in bankruptcy, Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 600.5451 , and has a different statute that grants specified exemptions to debtors generally.”
Show all 64 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(1) — 8 cases
In Re Spradlin, 231 B.R. 254 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1999). “§ 600.6023 as a whole indicates that when the legislature intended to allow the exemption of more than one item within a category of exemption, it did so by employing the words ‘all,’ ‘any,’ or a numerical denomination such as ‘ten.”
Lampkins v. Golden, 28 F. App'x 409 (6th Cir. 2002).
In Re Idalski, 123 B.R. 222 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1991).
Cunningham Davison Beeby Rogers & Alward v. Herr, 497 N.W.2d 575 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993).
Comerica Bank v. Michael Kelman (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(1)(Z) — 1 case
In Re Idalski, 123 B.R. 222 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1991).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(1)(f) — 7 cases
State Treasurer v. Gardner, 564 N.W.2d 51 (Mich. Ct. App. 1997). “§ 600.6023; M.S.A. § 27A.6023, which exempts property from levy and sale, precludes execution on his disability pension.”
Comerica Bank v. Michael Kelman (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
Comerica Bank v. Michael Kelman (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
Comerica Bank v. Michael Kelman (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
Comerica Bank v. Michael Kelman (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(1)(g) — 3 cases
Bob Woodward v. Christopher Schwartz (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
Bob Woodward v. Christopher Schwartz (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co. v. Walter N Slan (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(1)(h) — 1 case
In Re Forfeiture of 5118 Indian Garden Road, 654 N.W.2d 646 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(1)(k) — 5 cases
In Re Zott, 225 B.R. 160 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1998). “Creditor claims that by allowing Debtors to use § 600.6023 to satisfy 541(c)(2), and then allowing Debtors to use the federal exemptions provided under 522(d)(10)(E), Debtors are availing themselves of both state and federal exemptions, which is not allowed under the Code.”
in Re Coats Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
in Re Coats Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
in Re Coats Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
in Re Coats Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(1)(k)(i) — 2 cases
in Re Coats Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
in Re Coats Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(1)(l) — 1 case
In Re Zott, 225 B.R. 160 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1998). “Creditor claims that by allowing Debtors to use § 600.6023 to satisfy 541(c)(2), and then allowing Debtors to use the federal exemptions provided under 522(d)(10)(E), Debtors are availing themselves of both state and federal exemptions, which is not allowed under the Code.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(2) — 1 case
United States v. Ali H. Sawaf & Elena v. Sawaf, 74 F.3d 119 (6th Cir. 1996).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(3) — 2 cases
Bob Woodward v. Christopher Schwartz (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
Bob Woodward v. Christopher Schwartz (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(8) — 1 case
The Midwest Bank v. O'CONNELL, 405 N.W.2d 201 (Mich. Ct. App. 1987).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(a)(1) — 1 case
Noggle v. Beneficial Fin. Co. (In Re Noggle), 30 B.R. 303 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1983).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(a)(6) — 1 case
Lasich v. Est. of Wickstrom (In Re Wickstrom), 113 B.R. 339 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 1990). “The Michigan exemption statute in effect as of the bankruptcy filing date was Mich.Comp.Laws Ann. § 600.6023(a)(6) which states as follows: Sec.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(a)(8) — 3 cases
Leech v. Nichols (In Re Nichols), 4 B.R. 711 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1980).
Madison Nat'l Bank v. Chiapelli, 131 B.R. 354 (E.D. Mich. 1991).
In Re Oberlies, 94 B.R. 916 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1988).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(aX8) — 1 case
In Re Korff, 14 B.R. 189 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1981).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(h) — 2 cases
In Re Mcdonald, 471 B.R. 194 (E.D. Mich. 2012).
Corcoran v. McDonald (In re McDonald), 471 B.R. 194 (E.D. Mich. 2012).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(k) — 3 cases
Cunningham Davison Beeby Rogers & Alward v. Herr, 497 N.W.2d 575 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993).
in Re Coats Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
in Re Coats Est. (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(k)(l) — 1 case
In Re Tomlin, 315 B.R. 439 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2004).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(l)(a) — 2 cases
In Re Spears, 308 B.R. 793 (W.D. Mich. 2004). “” 4 She also relies upon Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 600.6023 (l)(h) as a basis for the exemption of her interest in this property.”
In Re Spradlin, 231 B.R. 254 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1999). “§ 600.6023 as a whole indicates that when the legislature intended to allow the exemption of more than one item within a category of exemption, it did so by employing the words ‘all,’ ‘any,’ or a numerical denomination such as ‘ten.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(l)(b) — 1 case
In Re Spradlin, 231 B.R. 254 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1999). “§ 600.6023 as a whole indicates that when the legislature intended to allow the exemption of more than one item within a category of exemption, it did so by employing the words ‘all,’ ‘any,’ or a numerical denomination such as ‘ten.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(l)(c) — 1 case
In Re Spradlin, 231 B.R. 254 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1999). “§ 600.6023 as a whole indicates that when the legislature intended to allow the exemption of more than one item within a category of exemption, it did so by employing the words ‘all,’ ‘any,’ or a numerical denomination such as ‘ten.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(l)(d) — 1 case
In Re Spradlin, 231 B.R. 254 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1999). “§ 600.6023 as a whole indicates that when the legislature intended to allow the exemption of more than one item within a category of exemption, it did so by employing the words ‘all,’ ‘any,’ or a numerical denomination such as ‘ten.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(l)(e) — 1 case
In Re Spradlin, 231 B.R. 254 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1999). “§ 600.6023 as a whole indicates that when the legislature intended to allow the exemption of more than one item within a category of exemption, it did so by employing the words ‘all,’ ‘any,’ or a numerical denomination such as ‘ten.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(l)(f) — 3 cases
Lasich v. Est. of Wickstrom (In Re Wickstrom), 113 B.R. 339 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 1990). “The Michigan exemption statute in effect as of the bankruptcy filing date was Mich.Comp.Laws Ann. § 600.6023(a)(6) which states as follows: Sec.”
In Re Spradlin, 231 B.R. 254 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1999). “§ 600.6023 as a whole indicates that when the legislature intended to allow the exemption of more than one item within a category of exemption, it did so by employing the words ‘all,’ ‘any,’ or a numerical denomination such as ‘ten.”
In Re Johnson, 439 B.R. 416 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2010). “Bankruptcy Judge Graves determined that Debtor’s disability payments under the Plan are exempt under Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 600.6023 (l)(f), and on appeal the district court observed that the disability payments “would facially appear to fall *443 within the scope of’ this…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(l)(g) — 1 case
In Re Spradlin, 231 B.R. 254 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1999). “§ 600.6023 as a whole indicates that when the legislature intended to allow the exemption of more than one item within a category of exemption, it did so by employing the words ‘all,’ ‘any,’ or a numerical denomination such as ‘ten.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(l)(h) — 3 cases
In Re Spears, 308 B.R. 793 (W.D. Mich. 2004). “” 4 She also relies upon Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 600.6023 (l)(h) as a basis for the exemption of her interest in this property.”
In re Demeter, 478 B.R. 281 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2012). “Michigan has a statute that grants specified exemptions for debtors in bankruptcy, Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 600.5451 , and has a different statute that grants specified exemptions to debtors generally.”
In Re Jones, 428 B.R. 720 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 2010).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(l)(k) — 7 cases
In Re Zott, 225 B.R. 160 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1998). “Creditor claims that by allowing Debtors to use § 600.6023 to satisfy 541(c)(2), and then allowing Debtors to use the federal exemptions provided under 522(d)(10)(E), Debtors are availing themselves of both state and federal exemptions, which is not allowed under the Code.”
In Re Spradlin, 231 B.R. 254 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1999). “§ 600.6023 as a whole indicates that when the legislature intended to allow the exemption of more than one item within a category of exemption, it did so by employing the words ‘all,’ ‘any,’ or a numerical denomination such as ‘ten.”
In Re Moss, 143 B.R. 465 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 1992).
Selflube, Inc v. Jjmt, Inc, 750 N.W.2d 245 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008).
United States v. Ali H. Sawaf & Elena v. Sawaf, 74 F.3d 119 (6th Cir. 1996).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.6023(l)(l)(i) — 1 case
Cunningham Davison Beeby Rogers & Alward v. Herr, 497 N.W.2d 575 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993).
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.