ESTATES AND PROTECTED INDIVIDUALS CODE
Act 386 of 1998
700.5408 Protective arrangements and single transactions authorized.
Sec. 5408.
(1) If it is established in a proper proceeding that a basis exists as described in section 5401 for affecting an individual's property and business affairs, the court, without appointing a conservator, may authorize, direct, or ratify a transaction necessary or desirable to achieve a security, service, or care arrangement meeting the protected individual's foreseeable needs. Protective arrangements include, but are not limited to, payment, delivery, deposit, or retention of money or property; sale, mortgage, lease, or other transfer of property; entry into an annuity contract, contract for life care, deposit contract, or contract for training and education; or an addition to or establishment of a suitable trust.
(2) If it is established in a proper proceeding that a basis exists as described in section 5401 for affecting an individual's property and business affairs, the court, without appointing a conservator, may authorize, direct, or ratify a contract, trust, or other transaction relating to the protected individual's property and business affairs if the court determines that the transaction is in the protected individual's best interests.
(3) Before approving a protective arrangement or other transaction under this section, the court shall consider the interests of the protected individual's creditors and dependents and, in view of the disability, whether the protected individual needs the continuing protection of a conservator. The court may appoint a special conservator to assist in the accomplishment of a protective arrangement or other transaction authorized under this section. The special conservator has the authority conferred by the order and serves until discharged by order after reporting to the court on all matters done under the appointment order.
History: 1998, Act 386, Eff. Apr. 1, 2000
PopularName Notes:
EPIC
Notes of Decisions
in Re Conservatorship of Rhea Brody, 909 N.W.2d 849 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
“*352 Under MCL 700.5408(1), courts may impose limited protective arrangements in lieu of a full conservatorship.”
In Re Conservatorship of Bittner, 879 N.W.2d 269 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 2× “5419(1), and MCL 700.5408 mandate that a court carefully and thoughtfully consider whether arrange- *243 merits less intrusive than a conservatorship will adequately protect an individual’s property as well as his or her autonomy.”
In Re Est. of Jerome E Sizick (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
· cites it 7× “-1- probate court to transfer all of Jerome’s assets and the majority of his income to Janet pursuant to MCL 700.5408. In a supplement filed with the petition, Janet explained that Jerome was suffering from multiple health problems, the “most significant” of which was dementia.”
in Re Conservatorship of Stephen Michalak (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 5× “5419(1), and MCL 700.5408 mandate that a court carefully and 3 Factually, Bittner involved a 74-year-old protected individual who lost her husband of 50 years and then developed serious health issues that required surgery, medications, and a temporary stay in a nursing home.”
In Re Hector M Hernandez Supplemental Needs Trust (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
· cites it 4× “5401 and MCL 700.5408. This is significant because EPIC mandates further notice requirements for petitions for “protective proceeding[s],” or those proceedings requesting a protective order to protect the property of disabled persons.”
In Re Est. of Sizick (Mich. 2026).
· cites it 4× “The court stated that it would enter a support order for Janet, as permitted by MCL 700.5408. The probate court also concluded that its findings gave it authority under MCL 700.”
In Re Est. of Jerome E Sizick (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 3× “5401, MCL 700.5408 provides: (1) If it is established in a proper proceeding that a basis exists as described in section 5401 for affecting an individual’s property and business affairs, the court, without appointing a conservator, may authorize, direct, or ratify a transaction…”
in Re Joseph Vansach Jr (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 2× “5407 and MCL 700.5408. See Bittner, 312 Mich App at 237, 241-242 .”
in Re Joseph Vansach Jr (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 2× “5407 and MCL 700.5408. See Bittner, 312 Mich App at 237, 241-242 .”
in Re Michael Declerck (Mich. Ct. App. 2019).
“See MCL 700.5408. A probate court considering a protective order should also bear in mind that the protected individual has the right to acquire, enjoy, and dispose of his or her own property.”
in Re Keith Norbert Schroeder (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).
“5401, MCL 700.5408(1) provides: If it is established in a proper proceeding that a basis exists as described in section 5401 for affecting an individual's property and business affairs, the court, without appointing a conservator, may authorize, direct, or ratify a transaction…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 700.5408(1) — 7 cases
in Re Conservatorship of Rhea Brody, 909 N.W.2d 849 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
“*352 Under MCL 700.5408(1), courts may impose limited protective arrangements in lieu of a full conservatorship.”
In Re Conservatorship of Bittner, 879 N.W.2d 269 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
“5419(1), and MCL 700.5408 mandate that a court carefully and thoughtfully consider whether arrange- *243 merits less intrusive than a conservatorship will adequately protect an individual’s property as well as his or her autonomy.”
in Re Conservatorship of Stephen Michalak (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
“5419(1), and MCL 700.5408 mandate that a court carefully and 3 Factually, Bittner involved a 74-year-old protected individual who lost her husband of 50 years and then developed serious health issues that required surgery, medications, and a temporary stay in a nursing home.”
in Re Keith Norbert Schroeder (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).
“5401, MCL 700.5408(1) provides: If it is established in a proper proceeding that a basis exists as described in section 5401 for affecting an individual's property and business affairs, the court, without appointing a conservator, may authorize, direct, or ratify a transaction…”
In Re Est. of Jerome E Sizick (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).
“5401, MCL 700.5408 provides: (1) If it is established in a proper proceeding that a basis exists as described in section 5401 for affecting an individual’s property and business affairs, the court, without appointing a conservator, may authorize, direct, or ratify a transaction…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 700.5408(2) — 2 cases
In Re Hector M Hernandez Supplemental Needs Trust (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
“5401 and MCL 700.5408. This is significant because EPIC mandates further notice requirements for petitions for “protective proceeding[s],” or those proceedings requesting a protective order to protect the property of disabled persons.”
In Re Est. of Sizick (Mich. 2026).
“The court stated that it would enter a support order for Janet, as permitted by MCL 700.5408. The probate court also concluded that its findings gave it authority under MCL 700.”
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.