Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 691 / Act 371 of 2012
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 691.1706 (2026)

Jurisdiction.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

UNIFORM ARBITRATION ACT


Act 371 of 2012


691.1706 Jurisdiction.

Sec. 26.

    (1) A court of this state that has jurisdiction over the controversy and the parties may enforce an agreement to arbitrate.

    (2) An agreement to arbitrate that provides for arbitration in this state confers exclusive jurisdiction on the court to enter judgment on an award under this act.

History: 2012, Act 371, Eff. July 1, 2013

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2016–2023 · leading case: Robert Gordon v. Cornerstone Rg LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Robert Gordon v. Cornerstone Rg LLC (Mich. Ct. App. 2016). “” MCL 691.1706. MCL 691.1705 states that an award can be “enforced as any other judgment in a civil action.”
Kristofor C Harrison v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (Mich. Ct. App. 2016). “” MCL 691.1706. Thus, the purpose in confirming an award is generally to enter a judgment on the same.”
John Henry Rozanski v. Fred S Findling (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “1706 provides guidance regarding a trial court’s jurisdiction in a case where arbitration is at issue, and provides, in pertinent part, as follows: (1) A court of this state that has jurisdiction over the controversy and the parties may enforce an agreement to arbitrate.”
John Henry Rozanski v. Fred S Findling (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “1706 provides guidance regarding a trial court’s jurisdiction in a case where arbitration is at issue, and provides, in pertinent part, as follows: (1) A court of this state that has jurisdiction over the controversy and the parties may enforce an agreement to arbitrate.”
the Caden Companies Inc v. Mj Steps (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “” MCL 691.1706; see also Lease Acceptance Corp v Adams, 272 Mich App 209, 219-220 ; 724 NW2d 724 (2006).”
the Caden Companies Inc v. Mj Steps (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “” MCL 691.1706; see also Lease Acceptance Corp v Adams, 272 Mich App 209, 219-220 ; 724 NW2d 724 (2006).”
Arthur Breithaupt v. Howard Melam Fam. Lp (Mich. Ct. App. 2020). “” MCL 691.1706; see also Lease Acceptance -13- Corp v Adams, 272 Mich App 209, 219-220 ; 724 NW2d 724 (2006).”
James M Perna v. Health One Credit Union (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). “1683(1), and provides a prevailing party to an arbitration proceeding “may move the [circuit] court for an order confirming the award at which time the court shall issue a confirming order unless the award is modified or corrected .”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 691.1706(2) — 1 case
James M Perna v. Health One Credit Union (Mich. Ct. App. 2023). “1683(1), and provides a prevailing party to an arbitration proceeding “may move the [circuit] court for an order confirming the award at which time the court shall issue a confirming order unless the award is modified or corrected .”
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.