AGE OF MAJORITY ACT OF 1971
Act 79 of 1971
722.52 Adult of legal age; support payments for person 18 years of age or older.
Sec. 2.
(1) Except as otherwise provided in the state constitution of 1963 and subsection (2), notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, a person who is at least 18 years of age on or after January 1, 1972, is an adult of legal age for all purposes whatsoever, and shall have the same duties, liabilities, responsibilities, rights, and legal capacity as persons heretofore acquired at 21 years of age.
(2) A court may order support payments for a person 18 years of age or older as provided in 1 or more of the following:
(a) Chapter 84 of the revised statutes of 1846, being sections 552.1 to 552.45 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
(b) The child custody act of 1970, Act No. 91 of the Public Acts of 1970, being sections 722.21 to 722.29 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
(c) The family support act, Act No. 138 of the Public Acts of 1966, being sections 552.451 to 552.459 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
(d) The paternity act, Act No. 205 of the Public Acts of 1956, being sections 722.711 to 722.730 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
(e) Act No. 293 of the Public Acts of 1968, being sections 722.1 to 722.6 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
History: 1971, Act 79, Eff. Jan. 1, 1972 ;-- Am. 1990, Act 104, Eff. Oct. 10, 1990
Compiler's Notes:
In subsection (2)(a), the phrase “revised statutes of 1846” evidently should read “Revised Statutes of 1846.”
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
34
cases (
8 in the last 5 years), 1974–2025 · leading case:
Woodman v. Kera LLC, 785 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 2010).
Woodman v. Kera LLC, 785 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 2010).
· cites it 6× “MCL 722.52. [16] Justice MARKMAN cites numerous instances in which the Legislature has permitted "parents to provide consent to their children's participation in numerous significant activities" as a basis for concluding that parental preinjury waivers are enforceable.”
Smith v. Smith, 447 N.W.2d 715 (Mich. 1989).
· cites it 10× “After MCL 722.52; MSA 25.244(52) reduced the age of majority to eighteen years, in our judgment, amendments of the child support and custody laws evidence the intention of the Legislature to leave intact the Johnson rationale.”
People v. Oliphant, 250 N.W.2d 443 (Mich. 1976).
· cites it 2× “Defendant contends that since the Age of Majority Act, MCLA 722.52; MSA 25.244(52), was effective prior to his trial, and that many 18- to 21-year-olds had registered to vote and were, therefore, eligible for jury service under MCLA 600.”
Charlton v. Charlton, 243 N.W.2d 261 (Mich. 1976).
· cites it 4× “*97 Defendant argues that the Age of Majority Act, in MCLA 722.52; MSA 25.244(52), [8] precludes any order of support after the age of 18.”
In Re Juv. Commitment Costs, 613 N.W.2d 348 (Mich. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 5× “*425 Further, MCL 722.52; MSA 25.244(52), being part of the Age of Majority Act of 1971, provides that, “notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary,” a person turning age 18 after January 1, 1972 is “an adult of legal age for all purposes whatsoever” except as…”
People v. Woolfolk, 848 N.W.2d 169 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
“” MCL 722.52(1). However, the act makes no *496 mention of the method of age calculation to be used.”
Weaver v. Giffels, 895 N.W.2d 555 (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 2× “’ ” Adkins v Adkins, 181 Mich App 81, 83 ; 448 NW2d 741 (1989), quoting MCL 722.52. See also Smith, 433 Mich at 614 .”
Dean v. Dean, 438 N.W.2d 355 (Mich. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 4× “" MCL 722.52; MSA 25.244(52). Since circuit court jurisdiction in divorce proceedings is defined by *716 statute, plaintiff's argument that MCR 3.”
Paaso v. Paaso, 428 N.W.2d 724 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 2× “The statute provides: Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, a person who is 18 years of age but less than 21 years of age when this act takes effect, and a person who attains 18 years of age thereafter, is deemed to be an adult of legal age for all purposes…”
Felcoski v. Felcoski, 407 N.W.2d 11 (Mich. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 2× “” MCL 722.52; MSA 25.244(52). Since circuit court jurisdiction in divorce proceedings is defined by statute, plaintiff’s argument that MCR 3.”
Rodriguez v. Solar of Michigan, Inc, 478 N.W.2d 914 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991).
“MCL 722.52(1); MSA 25.244(52X1). The plaintiff parents argue that Todd was living with them and they were financing his education at the time of his death and that they should be allowed to recover for these damages.”
Pellar v. Pellar, 443 N.W.2d 427 (Mich. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 2× “See also MCL 722.52; MSA 25.244(52). Although this Court in Paaso v Paaso, 170 Mich App 628 ; 428 NW2d 724 (1988), recently reached a contrary holding, we are not persuaded by the reasoning of that decision and therefore decline to depart from the previously settled state of the…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.52(1) — 12 cases
Woodman v. Kera LLC, 785 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 2010).
“MCL 722.52. [16] Justice MARKMAN cites numerous instances in which the Legislature has permitted "parents to provide consent to their children's participation in numerous significant activities" as a basis for concluding that parental preinjury waivers are enforceable.”
People v. Woolfolk, 848 N.W.2d 169 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
“” MCL 722.52(1). However, the act makes no *496 mention of the method of age calculation to be used.”
Rodriguez v. Solar of Michigan, Inc, 478 N.W.2d 914 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991).
“MCL 722.52(1); MSA 25.244(52X1). The plaintiff parents argue that Todd was living with them and they were financing his education at the time of his death and that they should be allowed to recover for these damages.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.52(2) — 2 cases
In Re Juv. Commitment Costs, 613 N.W.2d 348 (Mich. Ct. App. 2000).
“*425 Further, MCL 722.52; MSA 25.244(52), being part of the Age of Majority Act of 1971, provides that, “notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary,” a person turning age 18 after January 1, 1972 is “an adult of legal age for all purposes whatsoever” except as…”
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.