Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 703 / Act 288 of 1939
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 703.1 (2026)

Repealed. 1949, Act 125, Eff. Sept. 23, 1949;—1978, Act 642, Eff. July 1, 1979.

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

PROBATE CODE OF 1939


Act 288 of 1939


703.1 Repealed. 1949, Act 125, Eff. Sept. 23, 1949;—1978, Act 642, Eff. July 1, 1979.

    Repealed. 1949, Act 125, Eff. Sept. 23, 1949;—1978, Act 642, Eff. July 1, 1979.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases, 1950–2020 · leading case: Univ. Ctr., Inc. v. Ann Arbor Pub. Schs., 191 N.W.2d 302 (Mich. 1971).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Univ. Ctr., Inc. v. Ann Arbor Pub. Schs., 191 N.W.2d 302 (Mich. 1971). · cites it 10× “Without suggesting that such holding was not correct, we do not pass upon the licensing issue, because we conclude that the trial court’s analysis of the effect of guardianship under MCLA § 703.1 et seq. (Stat Ann 1971 Cum Supp § 27.”
Trbovich v. City of Detroit, 142 N.W.2d 696 (Mich. 1966). · cites it 2× “[1] CL 1948, § 703.1 (Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 27.3178[201]).”
Fornell v. Fornell Equip., Inc., 213 N.W.2d 172 (Mich. 1973). · cites it 2× “Fornell to be a spendthrift within the meaning o/MCLA 703.1; MSA 27.3178(201). Neither is it true that defendants asked that Bertil S.”
In Re Buckley's Est., 47 N.W.2d 33 (Mich. 1951). “3178(220)]), in effect at the time of the making of the orders involved in this case, provided for the management of the estate of the ward and directed the guardian to apply the income and profits thereof to the support of the ward and “his family, if there be any.”
Murray v. United States, 107 F. Supp. 290 (E.D. Mich. 1950). “Laws 1948, § 703.1, specifically authorizes the Probate Judge to appoint a guardian for all persons insane, imbecilic, idiotic or “mentally incompetent to have the care, custody and management of their estate;” and section 27.”
Geisland v. Csutoras, 261 N.W.2d 537 (Mich. Ct. App. 1977). “Carney pursuant to MCLA 703.1(7); MSA 27.3178(201X7) which reads: "Sec.”
In Re Fox Est., 142 N.W.2d 866 (Mich. Ct. App. 1966). “" CL 1948, § 703.1 (Stat Ann 1962 Rev § 27.3178[201]).”
Norris v. Norris, 69 N.W.2d 208 (Mich. 1955). “† CL 1948, § 703.1 (Stat Ann 1953 Cum Supp § 27.3178 [201]).”
Fornell v. Fornell Equip., Inc, 198 N.W.2d 694 (Mich. Ct. App. 1972). · cites it 2× “” The appointment by the probate court of a guardian for a spendthrift is authorized by MCLA 703.1; MSA 27.3178(201), which provides that: “The judge of probate in each county may, in all proper cases, appoint guardians of inhabitants or residents in his county, and also to such…”
Thornell v. Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Co., 166 F. Supp. 61 (W.D. Mich. 1958). “Laws 1948, § 703.1 et seq., M.S.A. § 27.3178(201) et seq.”
In the Matter of Antieau, 296 N.W.2d 254 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). “Schalk, guardian of the person of Ronald Michael Antieau pursuant to MCL 703.1(2); MSA 27.3178(201)(2). On April 1, 1976, appellant filed a petition for termination of this guardianship on the grounds that she was well able to care for and provide the love and affection…”
Antieau v. Schalk, 296 N.W.2d 254 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). “Schalk, guardian of the person of Ronald Michael Antieau pursuant to MCL 703.1(2); MSA 27.3178(201)(2). On April 1, 1976, appellant filed a petition for termination of this guardianship on the grounds that she was well able to care for and provide the love and affection…”
Show all 15 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 703.1(1) — 1 case
Univ. Ctr., Inc. v. Ann Arbor Pub. Schs., 191 N.W.2d 302 (Mich. 1971). “Without suggesting that such holding was not correct, we do not pass upon the licensing issue, because we conclude that the trial court’s analysis of the effect of guardianship under MCLA § 703.1 et seq. (Stat Ann 1971 Cum Supp § 27.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 703.1(2) — 2 cases
In the Matter of Antieau, 296 N.W.2d 254 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). “Schalk, guardian of the person of Ronald Michael Antieau pursuant to MCL 703.1(2); MSA 27.3178(201)(2). On April 1, 1976, appellant filed a petition for termination of this guardianship on the grounds that she was well able to care for and provide the love and affection…”
Antieau v. Schalk, 296 N.W.2d 254 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). “Schalk, guardian of the person of Ronald Michael Antieau pursuant to MCL 703.1(2); MSA 27.3178(201)(2). On April 1, 1976, appellant filed a petition for termination of this guardianship on the grounds that she was well able to care for and provide the love and affection…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 703.1(3) — 1 case
Fornell v. Fornell Equip., Inc., 213 N.W.2d 172 (Mich. 1973). “Fornell to be a spendthrift within the meaning o/MCLA 703.1; MSA 27.3178(201). Neither is it true that defendants asked that Bertil S.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 703.1(4) — 1 case
Fornell v. Fornell Equip., Inc, 198 N.W.2d 694 (Mich. Ct. App. 1972). “” The appointment by the probate court of a guardian for a spendthrift is authorized by MCLA 703.1; MSA 27.3178(201), which provides that: “The judge of probate in each county may, in all proper cases, appoint guardians of inhabitants or residents in his county, and also to such…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 703.1(7) — 1 case
Geisland v. Csutoras, 261 N.W.2d 537 (Mich. Ct. App. 1977). “Carney pursuant to MCLA 703.1(7); MSA 27.3178(201X7) which reads: "Sec.”
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.