Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 780.164 (2026)

Support order; payments; amount; deviation from formula.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

REVISED UNIFORM RECIPROCAL ENFORCEMENT OF SUPPORT ACT

Act 8 of 1952

780.164 Support order; payments; amount; deviation from formula.

Sec. 14.

(1) If the court of this state when acting as a responding court finds a duty of support, the court may order the obligor to furnish support and subject the property of the obligor to the order. The support order shall require that payments be made to the office of the friend of the court or the state disbursement unit, as appropriate.

(2) Except as otherwise provided in this section, the court shall order support in an amount determined by application of the child support formula developed by the state friend of the court bureau. The court may enter an order that deviates from the formula if the court determines from the facts of the case that application of the child support formula would be unjust or inappropriate and sets forth in writing or on the record all of the following:

(a) The support amount determined by application of the child support formula.

(b) How the support order deviates from the child support formula.

(d) The reasons why application of the child support formula would be unjust or inappropriate in the case.

(3) Subsection (2) does not prohibit the court from entering a support order that is agreed to by the parties and that deviates from the child support formula, if the requirements of subsection (2) are met.

History: 1952, Act 8, Eff. Sept. 18, 1952 ;-- Am. 1985, Act 172, Eff. Mar. 1, 1986 ;-- Am. 1989, Act 279, Imd. Eff. Dec. 26, 1989 ;-- Am. 1990, Act 241, Imd. Eff. Oct. 10, 1990 ;-- Am. 1999, Act 155, Imd. Eff. Nov. 3, 1999

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1980–2000 · leading case: Burba v. Burba, 610 N.W.2d 873 (Mich. 2000).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Burba v. Burba, 610 N.W.2d 873 (Mich. 2000). · cites it 2× “497 (allowing order of filiation and support); MCL 780.164; MSA 25.225(14) (allowing order of support when proceedings began in foreign jurisdiction).”

San Joaquin Cty. Cal. v. Dewey, 306 N.W.2d 418 (Mich. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 2× “MCL 780.164; MSA 25.225(14). This necessary duty has been statutorily defined in MCL 780.”

In re Marriage of Gifford, 521 N.E.2d 929 (Ill. 1988). “” ( Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. §780.158 (West 1982).”

Fitzwater v. Fitzwater, 294 N.W.2d 249 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). “MCL 780.164; MSA 25.225(14). If the money is • collected from the obligor, it is then sent to the court in the initiating state for distribution to the initiating party.”

State of Maine v. Horton, 297 N.W.2d 622 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). “MCL 780.164; MSA 25.225(14). "Duty of support” is defined by the act to include: "any duty of support imposed or imposable by law, or by any court order, decree or judgment, whether interlocutory or final, whether incidental to a proceeding for divorce, judicial (legal)…”

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.