Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 780.168 (2026)

Receipt and disbursement of payments; valid prior and existing support order; carrying out duties.

✓ 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

780.168 Receipt and disbursement of payments; valid prior and existing support order; carrying out duties.

Sec. 18.

(1) Except as provided in subsection (2), the court of this state, when acting as an initiating court, shall receive and disburse immediately all payments made by the obligor or sent by the responding court.

(2) If a valid prior and existing support order has been issued from a court of this state other than the initiating court, the initiating court shall transfer the order to furnish support to the court that issued the valid prior and existing court order and shall inform the court of the responding state of its action. The court that issued the valid prior and existing court order shall receive and disburse immediately all payments made by the obligor or sent by the responding court.

(3) The duties described in subsections (1) and (2) may be carried out through the office of the friend of the court, the clerk of the court, or the state disbursement unit, as appropriate.

History: 1952, Act 8, Eff. Sept. 18, 1952 ;-- Am. 1985, Act 172, Eff. Mar. 1, 1986 ;-- Am. 1999, Act 155, Imd. Eff. Nov. 3, 1999

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 1980–1980 · leading case: Fitzwater v. Fitzwater, 294 N.W.2d 249 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Fitzwater v. Fitzwater, 294 N.W.2d 249 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). “MCL 780.168; MSA 25.225(18). See generally the text and footnotes in Kulko, supra, 98-100 , Stewart, Domestic Relations: Interstate Enforcement of Support Orders: Necessity and Feasibility of Federal Legislation, 48 Cornell LQ 541 (1963), and Martin v Coffey, supra, 115.”

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.