Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 700 / Act 386 of 1998
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 700.5409 (2026)

Appointment of conservator.

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

ESTATES AND PROTECTED INDIVIDUALS CODE


Act 386 of 1998


700.5409 Appointment of conservator.

Sec. 5409.

    (1) The court may appoint an individual, a corporation authorized to exercise fiduciary powers, or a professional conservator described in section 5106 to serve as conservator of a protected individual's estate. The following are entitled to consideration for appointment in the following order of priority:

    (a) A conservator, guardian of property, or similar fiduciary appointed or recognized by the appropriate court of another jurisdiction in which the protected individual resides.

    (b) An individual or corporation nominated by the protected individual if he or she is 14 years of age or older and of sufficient mental capacity to make an intelligent choice, including a nomination made in a durable power of attorney.

    (c) The protected individual's spouse.

    (d) An adult child of the protected individual.

    (e) A parent of the protected individual or a person nominated by the will of a deceased parent.

    (f) A relative of the protected individual with whom he or she has resided for more than 6 months before the petition is filed.

    (g) A person nominated by the person who is caring for or paying benefits to the protected individual.

    (h) If none of the persons listed in subdivisions (a) to (g) are suitable and willing to serve, any person that the court determines is suitable and willing to serve.

    (2) A person named in subsection (1)(a), (c), (d), (e), or (f) may designate in writing a substitute to serve instead, and that designation transfers the priority to the substitute. If persons have equal priority, the court shall select the person the court considers best qualified to serve. Acting in the protected individual's best interest, the court may pass over a person having priority and appoint a person having a lower priority or no priority.

History: 1998, Act 386, Eff. Apr. 1, 2000 ;-- Am. 2000, Act 463, Eff. June 1, 2001

PopularName Notes:

EPIC
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 2017–2026 · leading case: in Re Conservatorship of Rhea Brody, 909 N.W.2d 849 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
in Re Conservatorship of Rhea Brody, 909 N.W.2d 849 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 7× “5409(2), grants the probate court authority to pass over "a person having priority and appoint a person having less priority or no priority" for the role of conservator if good cause exists.”
in Re guardianship/conservatorship of Harold William Gerstler, 922 N.W.2d 168 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 8× “5313 ; MCL 700.5409. Angelee was at the top of the list, and no evidence suggests that she was incompetent to serve or otherwise unsuitable for the position.”
Redd v. Carney (In re Redd), 909 N.W.2d 289 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “5404(2), and the court can consider several enumerated factors, including whether the potential conservator is "suitable and willing to serve," MCL 700.5409(1)(h). For removal, however, a petitioner must simply establish that removal of a current conservator would be *295 "for…”
in Re guardianship/conservatorship of Harold William Gerstler (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 8× “5313; MCL 700.5409. Angelee was at the top of the list, and no evidence suggests that she was incompetent to serve or otherwise unsuitable for the position.”
in Re Guardianship of David P Vanpoppelen (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 7× “5313, or MCL 700.5409]. [Emphasis added.] MCL 700.”
in Re Guardianship of Milan Kapp (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 5× “APPOINTMENT OF FRASER Mila and Bonnie first contend that the trial court abused its discretion by appointing Fraser as successor guardian and conservator without first holding an evidentiary hearing to determine whether either Mila or Bonnie is suitable to serve in those roles.”
in Re Guardianship of Milan Kapp (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 5× “APPOINTMENT OF FRASER Mila and Bonnie first contend that the trial court abused its discretion by appointing Fraser as successor guardian and conservator without first holding an evidentiary hearing to determine whether either Mila or Bonnie is suitable to serve in those roles.”
In Re Guardianship of Nmr (Mich. Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 3× “5313(2) and MCL 700.5409(1) respectively. Relevant here, if none of the statutorily identified persons are “suitable and willing to serve,” then a professional guardian or conservator may be appointed.”
In Re Guardianship of David P Vanpoppelen (Mich. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 2× “MCL 700.5409 establishes priority in the appointment of conservators and provides: -7- (1) The court may appoint an individual, a corporation authorized to exercise fiduciary powers, or a professional conservator described in section 5106 to serve as conservator of a protected…”
In Re Conservatorship of David P Vanpoppelen (Mich. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 2× “MCL 700.5409 establishes priority in the appointment of conservators and provides: -7- (1) The court may appoint an individual, a corporation authorized to exercise fiduciary powers, or a professional conservator described in section 5106 to serve as conservator of a protected…”
In Re Guardianship of Les (Mich. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “A conservator may be appointed under MCL 700.5409. Similar to guardianships, conservators must be suitable and willing to serve.”
in Re the Guardianship of Dorothy Redd (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “5404(2), and the court can consider several enumerated factors, including whether the potential conservator is “suitable and willing to serve,” MCL 700.5409(1)(h). For the removal, however, a petitioner must simply establish that removal of a current conservator would be “for…”
Show all 15 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 700.5409(1) — 6 cases
in Re Conservatorship of Rhea Brody, 909 N.W.2d 849 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “5409(2), grants the probate court authority to pass over "a person having priority and appoint a person having less priority or no priority" for the role of conservator if good cause exists.”
In Re Guardianship of Nmr (Mich. Ct. App. 2026). “5313(2) and MCL 700.5409(1) respectively. Relevant here, if none of the statutorily identified persons are “suitable and willing to serve,” then a professional guardian or conservator may be appointed.”
in Re Guardianship of Milan Kapp (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “APPOINTMENT OF FRASER Mila and Bonnie first contend that the trial court abused its discretion by appointing Fraser as successor guardian and conservator without first holding an evidentiary hearing to determine whether either Mila or Bonnie is suitable to serve in those roles.”
in Re Guardianship of Milan Kapp (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “APPOINTMENT OF FRASER Mila and Bonnie first contend that the trial court abused its discretion by appointing Fraser as successor guardian and conservator without first holding an evidentiary hearing to determine whether either Mila or Bonnie is suitable to serve in those roles.”
in Re Conservatorship of Rhea Brody, 911 N.W.2d 194 (Mich. 2018).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 700.5409(1)(a) — 4 cases
in Re Conservatorship of Rhea Brody, 909 N.W.2d 849 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “5409(2), grants the probate court authority to pass over "a person having priority and appoint a person having less priority or no priority" for the role of conservator if good cause exists.”
in Re guardianship/conservatorship of Harold William Gerstler, 922 N.W.2d 168 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “5313 ; MCL 700.5409. Angelee was at the top of the list, and no evidence suggests that she was incompetent to serve or otherwise unsuitable for the position.”
in Re guardianship/conservatorship of Harold William Gerstler (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “5313; MCL 700.5409. Angelee was at the top of the list, and no evidence suggests that she was incompetent to serve or otherwise unsuitable for the position.”
in Re Guardianship of David P Vanpoppelen (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “5313, or MCL 700.5409]. [Emphasis added.] MCL 700.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 700.5409(1)(b) — 2 cases
in Re Conservatorship of Rhea Brody, 909 N.W.2d 849 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “5409(2), grants the probate court authority to pass over "a person having priority and appoint a person having less priority or no priority" for the role of conservator if good cause exists.”
in Re Guardianship of David P Vanpoppelen (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “5313, or MCL 700.5409]. [Emphasis added.] MCL 700.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 700.5409(1)(c) — 1 case
in Re Conservatorship of Rhea Brody, 909 N.W.2d 849 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “5409(2), grants the probate court authority to pass over "a person having priority and appoint a person having less priority or no priority" for the role of conservator if good cause exists.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 700.5409(1)(d) — 4 cases
in Re Guardianship of David P Vanpoppelen (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “5313, or MCL 700.5409]. [Emphasis added.] MCL 700.”
in Re Guardianship of Milan Kapp (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “APPOINTMENT OF FRASER Mila and Bonnie first contend that the trial court abused its discretion by appointing Fraser as successor guardian and conservator without first holding an evidentiary hearing to determine whether either Mila or Bonnie is suitable to serve in those roles.”
in Re Guardianship of Milan Kapp (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “APPOINTMENT OF FRASER Mila and Bonnie first contend that the trial court abused its discretion by appointing Fraser as successor guardian and conservator without first holding an evidentiary hearing to determine whether either Mila or Bonnie is suitable to serve in those roles.”
In Re Conservatorship of Dpv (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 700.5409(1)(h) — 6 cases
Redd v. Carney (In re Redd), 909 N.W.2d 289 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “5404(2), and the court can consider several enumerated factors, including whether the potential conservator is "suitable and willing to serve," MCL 700.5409(1)(h). For removal, however, a petitioner must simply establish that removal of a current conservator would be *295 "for…”
in Re Conservatorship of Rhea Brody, 909 N.W.2d 849 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “5409(2), grants the probate court authority to pass over "a person having priority and appoint a person having less priority or no priority" for the role of conservator if good cause exists.”
in Re guardianship/conservatorship of Harold William Gerstler, 922 N.W.2d 168 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “5313 ; MCL 700.5409. Angelee was at the top of the list, and no evidence suggests that she was incompetent to serve or otherwise unsuitable for the position.”
in Re the Guardianship of Dorothy Redd (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “5404(2), and the court can consider several enumerated factors, including whether the potential conservator is “suitable and willing to serve,” MCL 700.5409(1)(h). For the removal, however, a petitioner must simply establish that removal of a current conservator would be “for…”
in Re guardianship/conservatorship of Harold William Gerstler (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “5313; MCL 700.5409. Angelee was at the top of the list, and no evidence suggests that she was incompetent to serve or otherwise unsuitable for the position.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 700.5409(2) — 5 cases
in Re Conservatorship of Rhea Brody, 909 N.W.2d 849 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “5409(2), grants the probate court authority to pass over "a person having priority and appoint a person having less priority or no priority" for the role of conservator if good cause exists.”
in Re guardianship/conservatorship of Harold William Gerstler, 922 N.W.2d 168 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “5313 ; MCL 700.5409. Angelee was at the top of the list, and no evidence suggests that she was incompetent to serve or otherwise unsuitable for the position.”
in Re Guardianship of Milan Kapp (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “APPOINTMENT OF FRASER Mila and Bonnie first contend that the trial court abused its discretion by appointing Fraser as successor guardian and conservator without first holding an evidentiary hearing to determine whether either Mila or Bonnie is suitable to serve in those roles.”
in Re Guardianship of Milan Kapp (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “APPOINTMENT OF FRASER Mila and Bonnie first contend that the trial court abused its discretion by appointing Fraser as successor guardian and conservator without first holding an evidentiary hearing to determine whether either Mila or Bonnie is suitable to serve in those roles.”
in Re guardianship/conservatorship of Harold William Gerstler (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “5313; MCL 700.5409. Angelee was at the top of the list, and no evidence suggests that she was incompetent to serve or otherwise unsuitable for the position.”
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.