THE MICHIGAN PENAL CODE
Act 328 of 1931
750.353 Contributions to charitable purposes, deduction from wages.
Sec. 353.
Contributions by laborers, etc., to charitable purposes and deductions from wages—Any employer of labor, who, by himself, his agent, clerk or servant, shall require any employe, or person seeking employment, as a condition of such employment or continuance therein, to make and enter into any contract, oral or written, whereby such employe or applicant for employment shall agree to contribute directly or indirectly to any fund for charitable, social or beneficial purpose or purposes, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
Any such employer, who, by himself, his agent, clerk or servant, shall deduct from the wages of any employe, directly or indirectly, any part thereof without the full and free consent of such employe, obtained without intimidation or fear of discharge for refusal to permit such deduction, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
If the employer be a firm or corporation, each and every member of said firm, and each and every managing officer of the corporation, shall be liable to punishment under this section; and any clerk, servant or agent of any such employer who shall do or attempt to do any act forbidden by this section, shall be equally liable with his employer or employers as principal, for any such violation of this section.
History: 1931, Act 328, Eff. Sept. 18, 1931 ;-- CL 1948, 750.353
FormerLaw Notes:
See sections 1 to 4 of Act 192 of 1893, being CL 1897, §§ 11400 to 11403; CL 1915, §§ 15118 to 15121; and CL 1929, §§ 8513 to 8516.
Notes of Decisions
Smigel v. Southgate Cmty. Sch. Dist., 202 N.W.2d 305 (Mich. 1972).
· cites it 2× “Plaintiffs in their complaint contend that the agency shop provision violated both the teachers' tenure act and The Michigan Penal Code (MCLA 750.353 et seq.; MSA 28.585 et seq.).”
Detroit Bd. of Educ. v. Parks, 296 N.W.2d 815 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980).
“Such deductions would not only raise constitutional problems, but are apparently prohibited by MCL 750.353; MSA 28.585. 16 MCL 423.206; MSA 17.”
Smigel v. Southgate Cmty. Sch. Dist., 180 N.W.2d 215 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970).
“Plaintiffs also contend that CL 1948, § 750.353 (Stat Ann 1954 Rev § 28.585) precludes any deduction from their wages without their consent.”
People of Michigan v. Troy Nell Brandom (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 2× “Therefore, once defendant was “charged with” violating MCL 750.535(7), under the clear and unambiguous language of the statute, he could not be “convicted of or punished for” violating any other section subsection MCL 750.”
People of Michigan v. Troy Nell Brandom (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 2× “Therefore, once defendant was “charged with” violating MCL 750.535(7), under the clear and unambiguous language of the statute, he could not be “convicted of or punished for” violating any other section subsection MCL 750.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.353(7) — 2 cases
People of Michigan v. Troy Nell Brandom (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
“Therefore, once defendant was “charged with” violating MCL 750.535(7), under the clear and unambiguous language of the statute, he could not be “convicted of or punished for” violating any other section subsection MCL 750.”
People of Michigan v. Troy Nell Brandom (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
“Therefore, once defendant was “charged with” violating MCL 750.535(7), under the clear and unambiguous language of the statute, he could not be “convicted of or punished for” violating any other section subsection MCL 750.”
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.