Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 767 / Act 175 of 1927
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 767.5a (2026)

Disclosing identity of informant; privileged and confidential communications.

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

THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE


Act 175 of 1927


767.5a Disclosing identity of informant; privileged and confidential communications.

Sec. 5a.

    (1)  a reporter or other person who is involved in the gathering or preparation of news for broadcast or publication shall not be required to disclose the identity of an informant, any unpublished information obtained from an informant, or any unpublished matter or documentation, in whatever manner recorded, relating to a communication with an informant, in any inquiry authorized by this act, except an inquiry for a crime punishable by imprisonment for life when it has been established that the information which is sought is essential to the purpose of the proceeding and that other available sources of the information have been exhausted.

    (2) Any communications between attorneys and their clients, between members of the clergy and the members of their respective churches, and between physicians and their patients are hereby declared to be privileged and confidential when those communications were necessary to enable the attorneys, members of the clergy, or physicians to serve as such attorney, member of the clergy, or physician.

History: Add. 1949, Act 311, Eff. Sept. 23, 1949 ;-- Am. 1951, Act 276, Eff. Sept. 28, 1951 ;-- Am. 1986, Act 293, Imd. Eff. Dec. 22, 1986

Compiler's Notes:

    At the beginning of subsection (1) of this section, “a” evidently should read “A”.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 29 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1979–2025 · leading case: People v. Bragg, 824 N.W.2d 170 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Bragg, 824 N.W.2d 170 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 20× “MCL 767.5a is a more recent enactment and more specifically governs the evidentiary use of a “privileged and confidential” communication.”
People v. Watkins; People v. Pullen, 818 N.W.2d 296 (Mich. 2012). · cites it 2× “35 MCL 767.5a(2). 36 MCL 600.2156. 37 For similar reasons, the majority misses the point when it concludes that my approach would result in court rules yielding to statutes that are based on some policy concerns but not others.”
In Re Contempt of Stone, 397 N.W.2d 244 (Mich. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 2× “First, we must determine the reach of Michigan’s "shield law,” MCL 767.5a; MSA 28.945(1). Second, we must decide if a television news reporter has a common-law or constitutional privilege to withhold information sought by a grand jury.”
In Re Grand Jury Investigation. Appeal of United States of Am., 918 F.2d 374 (3rd Cir. 1990). “§ 9-111 (1989); Mich.Comp.Laws § 767.5a(2) (1990); Minn.Stat.”
Compuware Corp. v. Moody's Investors Servs., Inc., 222 F.R.D. 124 (E.D. Mich. 2004). · cites it 3× “§ 767.5a(l), Plaintiff argues that the statute is not properly applied to civil cases.”
In Re Investigation of March 1999 Riots, 617 N.W.2d 310 (Mich. 2000). “MCL 767.5a; MSA 28.945(1). The media respond, point by point.”
In re DaimlerChrysler Ag Sec. Litig., 216 F.R.D. 395 (E.D. Mich. 2003). · cites it 2× “§ 767.5a(l), any unpublished material the Respondents obtained from their sources is protected from disclosure in a civil case.”
Marketos v. Am. Employers Ins., 460 N.W.2d 272 (Mich. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “[MCL 767.5a(1); MSA 28.945(1)(1).] Although the full gamut of press shield public policy arguments were debated by the Legislature in response to In re Contempt of Stone, [4] the Michigan press shield statute still applies only to the identities of informants and unpublished…”
Jilek v. Stockson, 796 N.W.2d 267 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010). “2162; journalistic sources, MCL 767.5a; physician-patient communications, MCL 600.”
People v. Johnson, 513 N.W.2d 824 (Mich. Ct. App. 1994). “Under MCL 767.5a(2); MSA 28.945(1)(2), communications are *585 privileged and confidential when they are necessary to enable an attorney to serve as an attorney.”
People v. Prominski, 839 N.W.2d 32 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 6× “MCL 767.5a(2) provides the evidentiary privilege for communications between members of the clergy and members of a church: Any communications between attorneys and their clients, between members of the clergy and the members of their respective churches, and between physicians…”
People v. Hoag, 281 N.W.2d 137 (Mich. Ct. App. 1979). “We do not perceive this problem as involving the scope of the reporter’s privilege to protect confidential sources under MCL 767.5a; MSA 28.945(1). As we see it, the question is whether the source of the information used by James to formulate his questions was relevant or…”
Show all 29 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 767.5a(1) — 1 case
Marketos v. Am. Employers Ins., 460 N.W.2d 272 (Mich. Ct. App. 1990). “[MCL 767.5a(1); MSA 28.945(1)(1).] Although the full gamut of press shield public policy arguments were debated by the Legislature in response to In re Contempt of Stone, [4] the Michigan press shield statute still applies only to the identities of informants and unpublished…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 767.5a(2) — 15 cases
People v. Bragg, 824 N.W.2d 170 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012). “MCL 767.5a is a more recent enactment and more specifically governs the evidentiary use of a “privileged and confidential” communication.”
People v. Watkins; People v. Pullen, 818 N.W.2d 296 (Mich. 2012). “35 MCL 767.5a(2). 36 MCL 600.2156. 37 For similar reasons, the majority misses the point when it concludes that my approach would result in court rules yielding to statutes that are based on some policy concerns but not others.”
In Re Grand Jury Investigation. Appeal of United States of Am., 918 F.2d 374 (3rd Cir. 1990). “§ 9-111 (1989); Mich.Comp.Laws § 767.5a(2) (1990); Minn.Stat.”
People v. Johnson, 513 N.W.2d 824 (Mich. Ct. App. 1994). “Under MCL 767.5a(2); MSA 28.945(1)(2), communications are *585 privileged and confidential when they are necessary to enable an attorney to serve as an attorney.”
People v. Prominski, 839 N.W.2d 32 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013). “MCL 767.5a(2) provides the evidentiary privilege for communications between members of the clergy and members of a church: Any communications between attorneys and their clients, between members of the clergy and the members of their respective churches, and between physicians…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 767.5a(l) — 3 cases
Compuware Corp. v. Moody's Investors Servs., Inc., 222 F.R.D. 124 (E.D. Mich. 2004). “§ 767.5a(l), Plaintiff argues that the statute is not properly applied to civil cases.”
In re DaimlerChrysler Ag Sec. Litig., 216 F.R.D. 395 (E.D. Mich. 2003). “§ 767.5a(l), any unpublished material the Respondents obtained from their sources is protected from disclosure in a civil case.”
Marketos v. Am. Employers Ins., 460 N.W.2d 272 (Mich. Ct. App. 1990). “[MCL 767.5a(1); MSA 28.945(1)(1).] Although the full gamut of press shield public policy arguments were debated by the Legislature in response to In re Contempt of Stone, [4] the Michigan press shield statute still applies only to the identities of informants and unpublished…”
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.