Michigan Compiled Laws
Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.701 (2026)
General personal jurisdiction over individuals.
✓ 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
600.701 General personal jurisdiction over individuals.
Sec. 701.
The existence of any of the following relationships between an individual and the state shall constitute a sufficient basis of jurisdiction to enable the courts of record of this state to exercise general personal jurisdiction over the individual or his representative and to enable such courts to render personal judgments against the individual or representative.
(1) Presence in the state at the time when process is served.
(2) Domicile in the state at the time when process is served.
(3) Consent, to the extent authorized by the consent and subject to the limitations provided in section 745.
History: 1961, Act 236, Eff. Jan. 1, 1963 ;-- Am. 1974, Act 88, Eff. Apr. 1, 1975
Compiler's Notes:
Section 2 of Act 88 of 1974 provides: “This 1974 amendatory act shall apply to actions commenced after its effective date, even if the cause of action arose prior thereto. Actions commenced prior to the effective date of this act shall not be affected thereby.”
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 93
cases (36 in the last 5 years), 1963–2026 · leading case: Lease Acceptance Corp. v. Adams, 724 N.W.2d 724 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006).
Lease Acceptance Corp. v. Adams, 724 N.W.2d 724 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). “" MCL 600.701(3). As just noted, MCL 600.701(3) allows a party to consent to Michigan jurisdiction, and, as we held in Potomac Leasing Co.”
Omne Fin., Inc v. Shacks, Inc, 596 N.W.2d 591 (Mich. 1999). “L. § 600.1651; MSA 27A.1651, which provides: An action brought in a county not designated as a proper county may nevertheless be tried therein, unless a defendant moves for a change of venue within the time and in the manner provided by court rule, in which case the court shall…”
SFS Check, LLC v. First Bank, 990 F. Supp. 2d 762 (E.D. Mich. 2013). “2012); see also MCL §§ 600.701, 600.705. The Sixth Circuit has held that “[w]here the state long-arm statute extends to the limits of the due process clause, the two inquiries are merged and the court need only determine whether exercising personal jurisdiction violates…”
AlixPartners v. Charles Brewington, 836 F.3d 543 (6th Cir. 2016). “Michigan’s long-arm statute allows a court to exercise “general” personal jurisdiction, Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.701 , as well as “limited” personal jurisdiction, id.”
Sifers v. Horen, 188 N.W.2d 623 (Mich. 1971). “) When we keep in mind that we are dealing not with general jurisdiction which is provided for in another part of the statute (MCLA § 600.701 [Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 27A.701]) which would expose a nonresident to suit in Michigan for any cause wherever it arose, *199 but rather with…”
Herman Theunissen & Ann Theunissen v. Sid Matthews D/B/A Matthews Lumber Transfer, 935 F.2d 1454 (6th Cir. 1991). “Mich.Comp. Laws Ann. § 600.701 (West 1981).”
Bagsby v. Gehres, 195 F. Supp. 2d 957 (E.D. Mich. 2002). “In Michigan, jurisdiction over the person can exist on the basis of general personal jurisdiction, see Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 600.701 and 600.711, or limited personal jurisdiction, see Mich.”
FFOC Co. v. Invent A.G., 882 F. Supp. 642 (E.D. Mich. 1994). “See Mich. Comp.Laws Ann. § 600.701. The second category provides for limited personal jurisdiction, allowing a court to hear only those actions that arise out of the acts specified.”
Mcnic Oil & Gas Co. v. Ibex Resources Co., LLC, 23 F. Supp. 2d 729 (E.D. Mich. 1998). “Mich.Comp.Laws Ann. § 600.701. 3 . Section 600.”
Lafarge Corp. v. Altech Env't USA, 220 F. Supp. 2d 823 (E.D. Mich. 2002). “In Michigan, jurisdiction over the person can exist on the basis of general *828 personal jurisdiction, see Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 600.701 and 600.711, or limited personal jurisdiction, see Mich.”
Unistrut Corp. v. Baldwin, 815 F. Supp. 1025 (E.D. Mich. 1993). “There exist two Michigan long-arm statutes governing when a Michigan forum may assert personal jurisdiction over a nonresident individual.”
Kiefer v. May, 208 N.W.2d 539 (Mich. Ct. App. 1973). “) When we keep in mind that we are dealing not with general jurisdiction which is provided for in another part of the statute (MCLA § 600.701 [Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 27A.701]) which would expose a nonresident to suit in Michigan for any cause wherever it arose, but rather with…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.701(1) — 4 cases
Haefner v. Bayman, 419 N.W.2d 29 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988).
In Re Trade Partners, Inc., 627 F. Supp. 2d 772 (W.D. Mich. 2008).
In Re Mjv (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
Matthew Maasdam v. Peri Weingrad (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.701(2) — 2 cases
In Re Mjv (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
Van Anda Aviation LLC v. Edward Patrick Manturuk (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.701(3) — 9 cases
Lease Acceptance Corp. v. Adams, 724 N.W.2d 724 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). “" MCL 600.701(3). As just noted, MCL 600.701(3) allows a party to consent to Michigan jurisdiction, and, as we held in Potomac Leasing Co.”
Omne Fin., Inc v. Shacks, Inc, 596 N.W.2d 591 (Mich. 1999). “L. § 600.1651; MSA 27A.1651, which provides: An action brought in a county not designated as a proper county may nevertheless be tried therein, unless a defendant moves for a change of venue within the time and in the manner provided by court rule, in which case the court shall…”
Omne Fin., Inc v. Shacks, Inc, 573 N.W.2d 641 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998).
In Re Trade Partners, Inc., 627 F. Supp. 2d 772 (W.D. Mich. 2008).
K Mart Corp. v. Knitjoy Mfg., Inc., 534 F. Supp. 153 (E.D. Mich. 1981).
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.