Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.8221 (2026)

Presiding judge; election; term; vacancies; authority.

✓ 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

600.8221 Presiding judge; election; term; vacancies; authority.

Sec. 8221.

The judges in each district shall meet and by a majority vote of all the judges serving in the district elect a presiding judge to hold office for 1 year. Vacancies in the office of presiding judge shall be filled in like manner. The presiding judge shall have full authority and control, subject to supervision of the supreme court, over all matters of administration. In any district having only 1 judge, such judge shall be the presiding judge. In districts having only 2 judges, the judge receiving the higher number of votes shall be the presiding judge for the year 1969 and thereafter the position of presiding judge shall be alternated.

History: Add. 1968, Act 154, Imd. Eff. June 17, 1968

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases, 1971–2010 · leading case: Pucci v. Nineteenth Dist. Court, 628 F.3d 752 (6th Cir. 2010).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Pucci v. Nineteenth Dist. Court, 628 F.3d 752 (6th Cir. 2010). “” Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.8101 (1) (emphasis added); see also Mich.”

Employees & Judge of the Second Jud. Dist. Court v. Hillsdale Cnty., 378 N.W.2d 744 (Mich. 1985). · cites it 2× “" MCL 600.8221; MSA 27A.8221. [4] See Note: The courts' inherent power to compel legislative funding of judicial functions, 81 Mich L R 1687-1701 (1983); Baar, Separate but subservient: Court budgeting in the American states, pp 6-7 (1975).”

Barachkov v. 41B Dist. Court, 311 F. App'x 863 (6th Cir. 2009). · cites it 2× “VI, § 1); Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.8101 (1) (Establishing one district court for the State of Michigan, and dividing that court into judicial districts “each of which is an administrative unit subject to the superintending control of the supreme court.”

Judges of the 74th Jud. Dist. v. Bay Cnty., 190 N.W.2d 219 (Mich. 1971). · cites it 2× “PA 1968, No 154 (MCLA § 600.8221; Stat Ann 1971 Cum Supp 27A.”

City of Ctr. Line v. Thirty-Seventh Dist. Court Judges, 253 N.W.2d 669 (Mich. Ct. App. 1977). “…by the caseload that is generated. Otherwise, the question is one addressed to the discretion of the presiding judge. MCLA 600.8221; MSA 27A.8221.”

Kell v. Johnson, 465 N.W.2d 26 (Mich. Ct. App. 1990). “8153, MCL 600.8221; MSA 27A.8221, and MCR 8.110(E) (3).”

Stanley v. City of Ferndale, 321 N.W.2d 681 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982). “MCL 600.8221; MSA 27A.8221. Under 1968 PA 154 , § 8271, the district court judges appoint court employees and fix their compensation within appropriations provided by the governing body of each district control unit.”

Menken v. 31st Dist. Court, 445 N.W.2d 527 (Mich. Ct. App. 1989). “One of those is the district court, which is divided into judicial districts. MCL 600.8101 et seq.”

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.