Michigan’s public employees are protected by government immunity for bad decisions

Michigan’s public employees are protected by government immunity for bad decisions

Sorry…Not Sorry

Michigan Governmental Immunity Laws

Michigan’s governmental immunity laws provide legal protection to government agencies and their employees in negligence lawsuits. Here are the key points:

Governmental Agency Immunity:

  • A governmental agency is immune from tort liability when engaged in the exercise or discharge of a governmental function.
  • This immunity does not modify or restrict the state’s immunity from tort liability as it existed before July 1, 1965.
  • The state’s immunity from tort liability is affirmed.

Officer and Employee Immunity:

Officers, employees, and volunteers acting on behalf of a governmental agency are immune from tort liability for injuries or property damage caused during the course of employment or service.

Conditions for immunity:

  • Acting within the scope of authority.
  • The governmental agency is engaged in a governmental function.
  • Conduct does not amount to gross negligence that proximately causes injury or damage.
  • Intentional torts are not covered by this immunity.

Specific Immunities:

  • Judges, legislators, and the highest appointive executive officials are immune from tort liability when acting within their respective authorities.
  • Guardians ad litem are immune when acting within their authority.

Why not you?

Because you don’t work for the government.

Watch the abuse in the near future

Relevant Michigan Compiled Laws (MCL) Links

News Articles on Michigan Immunity Laws

FAQs

Is Michigan a qualified immunity state?

  • In Michigan, qualified immunity is created by statute. Its application, however, is limited to state court civil actions alleging tortious behavior causing injury or damages, such as cases which allege assault, battery (excessive force claims), and injuries from vehicular accidents.

What are the exceptions to governmental immunity in Michigan?

  • Since 1986, most of the governmental immunity cases have been focused on the major exceptions to governmental immunity—failure to keep highways in reasonable repair, the negligent operation of government-owned motor vehicles, and dangerous or defective conditions in public buildings.

Who qualifies for immunity?

  • Qualified immunity only applies to suits against government officials as individuals, not suits against the government for damages caused by the officials’ actions. Although qualified immunity frequently appears in cases involving police officers, it also applies to most other executive branch officials.

What states are getting rid of qualified immunity?

  • In addition, cities and states can create their own causes of action to hold government officials accountable and ban qualified immunity as a potential defense. Today, four states—Colorado, Montana, Nevada, and New Mexico—have eliminated qualified immunity for state constitutional lawsuits against police officers.

Here’s the Law
MCL Section 691.1407

691.1407 Immunity from tort liability; intentional torts; immunity of judge, legislator, official, and guardian ad litem; immunity of governmental agency under MISS DIG underground facility damage prevention and safety act; definitions.

Sec. 7.

    (1) Except as otherwise provided in this act, a governmental agency is immune from tort liability if the governmental agency is engaged in the exercise or discharge of a governmental function. Except as otherwise provided in this act, this act does not modify or restrict the immunity of the state from tort liability as it existed before July 1, 1965, which immunity is affirmed.
    (2) Except as otherwise provided in this section, and without regard to the discretionary or ministerial nature of the conduct in question, each officer and employee of a governmental agency, each volunteer acting on behalf of a governmental agency, and each member of a board, council, commission, or statutorily created task force of a governmental agency is immune from tort liability for an injury to a person or damage to property caused by the officer, employee, or member while in the course of employment or service or caused by the volunteer while acting on behalf of a governmental agency if all of the following are met:
    (a) The officer, employee, member, or volunteer is acting or reasonably believes he or she is acting within the scope of his or her authority.
    (b) The governmental agency is engaged in the exercise or discharge of a governmental function.
    (c) The officer’s, employee’s, member’s, or volunteer’s conduct does not amount to gross negligence that is the proximate cause of the injury or damage.
    (3) Subsection (2) does not alter the law of intentional torts as it existed before July 7, 1986.
    (4) This act does not grant immunity to a governmental agency or an employee or agent of a governmental agency with respect to providing medical care or treatment to a patient, except medical care or treatment provided to a patient in a hospital owned or operated by the department of community health or a hospital owned or operated by the department of corrections and except care or treatment provided by an uncompensated search and rescue operation medical assistant or tactical operation medical assistant.
    (5) A judge, a legislator, and the elective or highest appointive executive official of all levels of government are immune from tort liability for injuries to persons or damages to property if he or she is acting within the scope of his or her judicial, legislative, or executive authority.
    (6) A guardian ad litem is immune from civil liability for an injury to a person or damage to property if he or she is acting within the scope of his or her authority as guardian ad litem. This subsection applies to actions filed before, on, or after May 1, 1996.
    (7) The immunity provided by this act does not apply to liability of a governmental agency under the MISS DIG underground facility damage prevention and safety act.
    (8) As used in this section:
    (a) “Gross negligence” means conduct so reckless as to demonstrate a substantial lack of concern for whether an injury results.
    (b) “Search and rescue operation” means an action by a governmental agency to search for, rescue, or recover victims of a natural or manmade disaster, accident, or emergency on land or water.
    (c) “Search and rescue operation medical assistant” means an individual licensed to practice 1 or more of the occupations listed in subdivision (e), acting within the scope of the license, and assisting a governmental agency in a search and rescue operation.
    (d) “Tactical operation” means a coordinated, planned action by a special operations, weapons, or response team of a law enforcement agency that is 1 of the following:
    (i) Taken to deal with imminent violence, a riot, an act of terrorism, or a similar civic emergency.
    (ii) The entry into a building, area, watercraft, aircraft, land vehicle, or body of water to seize evidence, or to arrest an individual for a felony, under the authority of a warrant issued by a court.
    (iii) Training for the team.
    (e) “Tactical operation medical assistant” means an individual licensed to practice 1 or more of the following, acting within the scope of the license, and assisting law enforcement officers while they are engaged in a tactical operation:
    (i) Medicine, osteopathic medicine and surgery, or as a registered professional nurse, under article 15 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.16101 to 333.18838.
    (ii) As an emergency medical technician, emergency medical technician specialist, or paramedic under part 209 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.20901 to 333.20979.
Attorney Michael Komorn

Attorney Michael Komorn

State / Federal Legal Defense

With extensive experience in criminal legal defense since 1993 from pre-arrest, District, Circuit, Appeals, Supreme and the Federal court systems.

KOMORN LAW (248) 357-2550

Squatters in Michigan

Squatters in Michigan

SquattersSquatting, in one definition is the unauthorized occupation of a property, can be a frustrating ordeal for property owners in Michigan. Understanding the relevant laws and procedures is crucial for regaining possession of your property.Squatting vs. Adverse...

read more

Other Articles

What is the Exclusionary Rule?

What is the Exclusionary Rule?

What is the Exclusionary Rule?The Exclusionary Rule is a legal principle in the United States that prevents the government from using most evidence gathered in violation of the United States Constitution. Specifically, it applies to evidence obtained through an...

I am going to Canada – Can I bring my cannabis?

I am going to Canada – Can I bring my cannabis?

Borders and Cannabis and MoneyFerengi Rule of Acquisition #41. Profit is its own reward.If you bring your own cannabis to Canada. How does the Canadian government profit?  They don't so they will punish you if you get caught. It's simple. It's about the money. That is...

Squatters in Michigan

Squatters in Michigan

SquattersSquatting, in one definition is the unauthorized occupation of a property, can be a frustrating ordeal for property owners in Michigan. Understanding the relevant laws and procedures is crucial for regaining possession of your property.Squatting vs. Adverse...

Vehicle Forfeiture in Canada – The Process of Taking

Vehicle Forfeiture in Canada – The Process of Taking

Thank You... and have a nice day eh!Disclaimer: We are not Attorneys in Canada.  This is an article of information obtained from various sources and presented here. We can only assume they are accurate.  If you ever find a reason to go to Canada and need a lawyer...we...

Squatters in Michigan

Squatters in Michigan

Squatters

Squatting, in one definition is the unauthorized occupation of a property, can be a frustrating ordeal for property owners in Michigan. Understanding the relevant laws and procedures is crucial for regaining possession of your property.

Squatting vs. Adverse Possession: Key Differences

Michigan law differentiates between squatting and adverse possession. Squatting refers to the unlawful occupation of a property without the owner’s consent. In contrast, adverse possession allows someone who isn’t the legal owner to gain ownership rights under specific circumstances, as outlined in MCL § 600.5801. To establish adverse possession, an occupant must demonstrate:

  • Continuous occupancy: Occupying the property for at least 15 consecutive years (MCL § 600.5801(1)).
  • Color of title: Possessing a document, though potentially flawed, that suggests ownership (MCL § 600.5801(2)). However, simply paying rent or utilities doesn’t constitute color of title.
  • Payment of property taxes: Paying property taxes for at least ten consecutive years (MCL § 600.5801(2)).

Open, notorious, and hostile possession: Occupying the property openly, demonstrably, and claiming it as their own, even if mistakenly (MCL § 600.5801(3, 4)).

The burden of proof lies with the squatter to establish adverse possession. Notably, Michigan courts have interpreted these requirements strictly, making it difficult for squatters to gain ownership rights.

Attorney Michael Komorn

Attorney Michael Komorn

State / Federal Legal Defense

With extensive experience in criminal legal defense since 1993 from pre-arrest, District, Circuit, Appeals, Supreme and the Federal court systems.

KOMORN LAW (248) 357-2550

Self-Help Eviction: A Unique Feature in Michigan

Michigan offers a unique remedy for property owners facing squatters: self-help eviction. Unlike most states, Michigan law allows owners to take specific steps to make the property unappealing for squatters, encouraging them to leave voluntarily.

Important Caveats: It’s crucial to note that self-help eviction has limitations:

No removal of belongings: Owners cannot remove the squatter’s belongings or physically force them out.

Tenant vs. squatter: This method only applies to squatters, not tenants with a valid lease agreement. Evicting tenants requires a formal eviction process through the court system.

Potential legal repercussions: Improper use of self-help measures could result in legal action from the squatter. Consulting an attorney before taking any steps is highly recommended.

Getting Rid of Squatters

If you discover that someone unauthorized is occupying your property, contact the police. However, be aware that the police may consider it a civil issue and advise you to pursue eviction through the courts. It is important to note that squatting is considered a misdemeanor in Michigan, even if law enforcement may not be fully aware of this fact.

Instead of waiting on or dealing with the police, property owners in Michigan can take action to remove illegal occupants within the limits of the law:

 

  • Kindly request the squatter to vacate the premises within a specified timeframe.
  • Notify the squatter that legal measures will be pursued if they fail to comply promptly.
  • While the squatter is away from the property, consider changing the locks, securing entry points, boarding up windows, and implementing additional barriers like fences to prevent re-entry.

Squatters in Michigan

SquattersSquatting, in one definition is the unauthorized occupation of a property, can be a frustrating ordeal for property owners in Michigan. Understanding the relevant laws and procedures is crucial for regaining possession of your property.Squatting vs. Adverse...

Criminal Trespass: Legal Ramifications of Squatting

Squatting in Michigan is considered criminal trespass under MCL 750.553. This statute classifies trespassing as a misdemeanor for first offenses, punishable by fines up to $5,000 or imprisonment for up to 180 days, or both. Subsequent offenses become felonies with steeper penalties.

There are additional trespassing classifications based on the property type:

  • Residential property: Trespassing on a single-family or two-family dwelling is typically a misdemeanor.
  • Commercial property: Trespassing on commercial buildings, industrial sites, construction zones, or utility property can be charged as a felony.

Property owners who suspect squatting should contact law enforcement. Officers can remove squatters if they lack a legal right to be on the property.

The Law

750.553 Occupancy of building without consent; violation; penalty; exception.

Sec. 553.

    (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), an individual who occupies a building that is a single-family dwelling or 1 or both units in a building that is a 2-family dwelling and has not, at any time during that period of occupancy, occupied the property with the owner’s consent for an agreed-upon consideration is guilty of a crime as follows:
    (a) For a first offense, a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $5,000.00 per dwelling unit occupied or imprisonment for not more than 180 days, or both.
    (b) For a second or subsequent offense, a felony punishable by a fine of not more than $10,000.00 per dwelling unit occupied or imprisonment for not more than 2 years, or both.
    (2) Subsection (1) does not apply to a guest or a family member of the owner of the dwelling or of a tenant.

Other Articles

What is the Exclusionary Rule?

What is the Exclusionary Rule?

What is the Exclusionary Rule?The Exclusionary Rule is a legal principle in the United States that prevents the government from using most evidence gathered in violation of the United States Constitution. Specifically, it applies to evidence obtained through an...

I am going to Canada – Can I bring my cannabis?

I am going to Canada – Can I bring my cannabis?

Borders and Cannabis and MoneyFerengi Rule of Acquisition #41. Profit is its own reward.If you bring your own cannabis to Canada. How does the Canadian government profit?  They don't so they will punish you if you get caught. It's simple. It's about the money. That is...

Squatters in Michigan

Squatters in Michigan

SquattersSquatting, in one definition is the unauthorized occupation of a property, can be a frustrating ordeal for property owners in Michigan. Understanding the relevant laws and procedures is crucial for regaining possession of your property.Squatting vs. Adverse...

Vehicle Forfeiture in Canada – The Process of Taking

Vehicle Forfeiture in Canada – The Process of Taking

Thank You... and have a nice day eh!Disclaimer: We are not Attorneys in Canada.  This is an article of information obtained from various sources and presented here. We can only assume they are accurate.  If you ever find a reason to go to Canada and need a lawyer...we...

More Posts

Squatters in Michigan

Squatters in Michigan

SquattersSquatting, in one definition is the unauthorized occupation of a property, can be a frustrating ordeal for property owners in Michigan. Understanding the...

read more
Michigan Workers Right to Protest – Can They Force a Change in Business Strategy?

Michigan Workers Right to Protest – Can They Force a Change in Business Strategy?

Michigan Workers and the Right to Protest: Can They Force a Change in Business Strategy?

The ever-evolving economic landscape can create friction between Michigan workers and their employers. Workers may find themselves at odds with company strategies or investments, leading to protests aimed at forcing a change. But what legal rights do these workers have, and can they truly compel an alteration in business direction?

The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) Framework

The foundation for worker protest rights in Michigan lies in the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) of 1935. This federal law guarantees workers the right to engage in “concerted activities” for the purpose of “collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection.” However, the NLRA doesn’t grant a blank check for protest.

The key lies in the distinction between protected and unprotected activities.

Protected Protests: When Workers Have a Voice

Protected protests focus on issues directly related to the terms and conditions of employment, which are core subjects of collective bargaining. Examples include strikes or rallies over:

Wages and Benefits: Negotiations for fairer pay, improved health insurance plans, or additional paid time off fall under this category.

Job Security: Protests against layoffs, plant closures, or outsourcing of jobs directly impact job security, a core bargaining right. The seminal case, NLRB v. Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co. (1938) [URL nlrb v mackay radio & telegraph co 1938 ON Cornell University law.cornell.edu], established the right to strike over unfair labor practices that threaten job security.

Working Conditions: Protests concerning safety standards, excessive overtime, or unfair disciplinary actions are protected activities.

APPEALS in STATE or FEDERAL COURT
When you need to appeal a decision you feel is wrong.
Call Komorn Law
 (248) 357-2550

Unprotected Protests: When Business Decisions Hold Sway

Protests targeting broader business decisions, such as:

Plant Closures or Relocations: These decisions often involve complex economic factors beyond just labor costs. The NLRB v. Babcock & Wilcox Co. (1956) case exemplifies this.

Here, the closure was deemed outside the scope of mandatory bargaining as it wasn’t solely motivated by labor costs.

Product Development: Worker protests against specific product lines or company investments fall outside the scope of core bargaining rights.

Strategies for Effective Protests, Even When Business Strategy Reigns Supreme

While forcing a change in business strategy might be challenging, effective worker protests can still achieve significant results:

Focus on Core Bargaining Rights: Frame protests around the impact of the business decision on wages, benefits, or job security.

Negotiate with Management: Open communication with management can unearth underlying reasons for the decision and explore possible alternatives.

Union Strength: Unionized workers have greater leverage in negotiations and may have more protected activity under collective bargaining agreements.

Public Pressure: Utilize media outreach to raise awareness about the impact of the decision on workers and the local economy.

Political Advocacy: Lobby representatives to push for policies that protect worker interests in plant closures or relocations.

or just quit and go work at the record store.

Here are some of the laws in Michigan regarding employment relations…enjoy.

MCL – Act 176 of 1939

EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION
Act 176 of 1939
AN ACT to create a commission relative to labor disputes, and to prescribe its powers and duties; to provide for the mediation and arbitration of labor disputes, and the holding of elections thereon; to regulate the conduct of parties to labor disputes and to require the parties to follow certain procedures; to regulate and limit the right to strike and picket; to protect the rights and privileges of employees, including the right to organize and engage in lawful concerted activities; to protect the rights and privileges of employers; to make certain acts unlawful; to make appropriations; and to prescribe means of enforcement and penalties for violations of this act.
The “People” of the State of Michigan enact:
Document Type Description
Section 423.1 Section Declaration of public policy.
Section 423.2 Section Definitions.
Section 423.3 Section Employment relations commission; creation; appointment, qualifications, and terms of commissioners.
Section 423.4 Section Employment relations commission; oath of commissioners; vacancies; chairman; removal; quorum; seal.
Section 423.5 Section Employment relations commission; compensation and expenses of commissioners and employees.
Section 423.6 Section Repealed. 1978, Act 250, Imd. Eff. June 20, 1978.
Section 423.7 Section Employment relations commission; principal office; office space; rules.
Section 423.7a Section Employment relations commission; conducting business at public meeting; notice of meeting; availability of certain writings to public.
Section 423.8 Section Employees; rights.
Section 423.9 Section Prerequisites for strike or lockout; notice of dispute and statement of issues; mediation.
Section 423.9a Section Election in case of impending strike; conduct and supervision; time; persons entitled to vote; secret ballot; place; rules; absentee voting; hearing on eligibility to vote; determination.
Section 423.9b, 423.9c Section Repealed. 1978, Act 250, Imd. Eff. June 20, 1978.
Section 423.9d Section Voluntary arbitration; existing collective agreement as binding on parties; agreement to arbitrate; designation of arbitrator; expense of arbitration; enforcement of agreement; hearings; notice; procedure; transcript; findings; opinion and award; enforcement of award.
Section 423.9e Section Bargaining unit.
Section 423.9f Section Mass picketing; threats or force, picketing private residence, misdemeanor.
Section 423.9g Section Copy or statement of most recent offer submitted by employer to bargaining unit.
Section 423.10 Section Steps by commission to effect settlement.
Section 423.11 Section Hearings; witnesses; oaths; evidence; subpoena; order requiring appearance; contempt; service of process or papers; proof of service.
Section 423.12 Section Disqualification of commissioner.
Section 423.13-423.13g Section Repealed. 1978, Act 250, Imd. Eff. June 20, 1978.
Section 423.14 Section Collective bargaining agreement between employer and labor organization; sharing of financial support of labor organization; payment of dues; condition of employment; appropriation.
Section 423.15 Section Unlawful possession of property; penalty.
Section 423.16 Section Company unions; interference with unions and discrimination prohibited.
Section 423.17 Section Prohibited conduct; violation; civil fine.
Section 423.17a Section Unlawful picketing to force recognition or bargain with labor organization.
Section 423.19 Section Liberal construction of act; police powers.
Section 423.20 Section Expenses paid from legislated appropriations.
Section 423.22 Section Unlawful acts; legal or equitable remedy.
Section 423.22a Section Repealed. 1949, Act 230, Imd. Eff. May 31, 1949.
Section 423.23 Section Review of rulings or orders by supreme court; exceptions; violations of certain provisions as unfair labor practices; remedies; procedures.
Section 423.24 Section Conspiracy; penalty.
Section 423.25 Section Written findings as to matters in disagreement; availability of writings to public.
Section 423.25a Section Confidential information.
Section 423.26 Section Collective bargaining representatives; duties; grievances by individual employee; adjustment.
Section 423.27 Section Petition as to representation; investigation; hearing; election.
Section 423.28 Section Determination of appropriate unit for collective bargaining.
Section 423.29 Section Directing election in bargaining unit; eligibility to vote; rules; rerun and runoff elections; election on petition of persons not parties to collective bargaining agreement.
Section 423.30 Section Duty to bargain; collective bargaining, definition.

Conclusion

While Michigan law protects worker protest rights, there’s a fine line between influencing company strategy and exceeding the boundaries of protected activity. By focusing on core bargaining rights, employing strategic protest tactics, and understanding the legal framework, Michigan workers can effectively advocate for their interests. But can also hear the words… You’re fired. We are moving overseas.

Consulting with legal counsel specializing in labor law is crucial when navigating the complexities of protest rights and business decision-making.

In the FEDERAL COURT SYSTEM
When you need to go on the offense – to put the prosecution on defense
Komorn Law (248) 357-2550.

Can I be arrested for DUI riding my bike high in Michigan?

Can I be arrested for DUI riding my bike high in Michigan?

Recreational Cannabis is “legal” in Michigan.

Can I be arrested for riding my bike high in Michigan?

First… What is the definition of a bicycle?

MCL 257.4 defines a “bicycle” as:

“…a device propelled by human power upon which a person may ride, having either 2 or 3 wheels in a tandem or tricycle arrangement, all of which are over 14 inches in diameter.”

Does a bicyclist have to obey the same traffic laws as a motorist?

Yes, with exceptions.  MCL 257.657 states:

“Each person riding a bicycle…upon a roadway has all of the rights and is subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle by this chapter, except as to special regulations in this article and except as to the provisions of this chapter which by their nature do not have application.”

Can you be charged with a DUI or biking high while riding your bicycle?

No. Although it is dangerous to ride while intoxicated, a bicycle is not a motor vehicle according to state law. DUI applies only to motor vehicle operators.

Other laws will be weaponized against you however, such as disorderly conduct.

DUI Charges?
Sometimes it’s cheaper in the long run to fight them
Call to Fight for your Rights (248) 357-2550

By the way…

Is it legal to use a cell phone or text while riding a bicycle?

Only if the cell phone is in hands-free mode. MCL 257.661 states:

“A person operating a bicycle…shall not carry any package, bundle, or article that prevents the driver from keeping both hands upon the handlebars of the vehicle.”

The Michigan Point System

Each traffic violation has a point value, which is set by law in the Michigan Vehicle Code.

Read about it here

Traffic FAQs – Traffic Crashes & Reports

Traffic FAQs – Traffic Crashes & Reports

Traffic FAQs – Traffic Crashes & Reports

  • Know the laws if you get pulled over.
  • Know who to call if you need legal defense if a violation turns into a DUI or worse. That would be us.

Traffic Crashes & Reports

Beginning in July 2005, the State of Michigan launched a new website dedicated to online purchasing of traffic crash reports.

Interested parties may be able to purchase a copy of a traffic crash report taken by any Michigan law enforcement agency.

Traffic Crash Purchasing System

Question: I was involved in a traffic crash in the past and need a copy of the report. Where can I obtain one?

Answer: Interested parties such as individuals involved in the crash and/or their attorney, and insurance companies should contact the Traffic Crash Purchasing System(TCPS) via the internet at the aforementioned link. If unable to do so you can contact the Michigan State Police Post that responded to the crash. A listing of state police posts is follows.

State Police Posts

Each post retains traffic crash reports for the current year plus two years. If the crash occurred prior to that you must request a copy of the report from the Criminal Justice Information Center using a Freedom of Information Request form.

In addition, if you are not an interested party as described above, you must complete a Freedom of Information Request to obtain a specific traffic crash report.

Complete the form with as much information as possible and mail to the address listed on the form.

FOI Request

If another agency other than the Michigan State Police responded and completed a crash report, you will need to contact that agency directly or utilize the TCP.

DUI Charges?
Sometimes it’s cheaper in the long run to fight them
Call to Fight for your Rights (248) 357-2550

The Michigan Point System

Each traffic violation has a point value, which is set by law in the Michigan Vehicle Code.

Read about it here

Question:  What is a State of Michigan Traffic Crash Report (UD-10)?

Answer: The State of Michigan Traffic Crash Report (UD-10) is a form that must be completed by law (MCL 257.622) on all reportable crashes. The report is completed by all law enforcement agencies and is forwarded to the Michigan State Police for analysis for the purpose of furnishing statistical information and preparing compiled crash data.

Here’s the law

257.622 Report of accidents resulting in death, personal injury, or property damage; forms; analysis; use; retention.

Sec. 622.

     The driver of a motor vehicle involved in an accident that injures or kills any person, or that damages property to an apparent extent totaling $1,000.00 or more, shall immediately report that accident at the nearest or most convenient police station, or to the nearest or most convenient police officer.
The officer receiving the report, or his or her commanding officer, shall immediately forward each report to the director of the department of state police on forms prescribed by the director of the department of state police.
The forms shall be completed in full by the investigating officer. The director of the department of state police shall analyze each report relative to the cause of the reported accident and shall prepare information compiled from reports filed under this section for public use.
A copy of the report under this section and copies of reports required under section 621 shall be retained for at least 3 years at the local police department, sheriff’s department, or local state police post making the report.

Disclaimer: This Frequently Asked Questions page is provided solely as a means of providing basic answers to questions about the Michigan Vehicle Code and is not designed or intended to provide a basis to contest a citation for a violation of the code. The positions stated are only those of the Michigan Department of State Police and are not binding on any other law enforcement agency or any Court. If our position is supported by case law then it will be enumerated within the answer provided. Source of Information – Traffic Laws FAQ

Berkley state representative introduces bill to police noise from cars

Berkley state representative introduces bill to police noise from cars

A Michigan bill aims to crack down on excessive noise from vehicles with intentional modifications.

The Problem:

    • Loud vehicles are a nuisance for residents, especially along Woodward Avenue, a popular cruising destination.
    • The current law is unclear and difficult to enforce. It prohibits modifying vehicles to create excessive noise but also mentions decibel level limits, impractical for on-the-spot enforcement.

The Bill:

    • House Bill 5696, introduced by Rep. Natalie Price, targets vehicles intentionally modified to be loud.
    • It clarifies the law, making it clear that such modifications are illegal.
    • Penalties would increase:

        • First offense: $100 to $500
        • Subsequent offenses: $1,000

The Concerns:

    • Car enthusiasts are concerned about:

        • Law enforcement potentially targeting factory-made loud vehicles.
        • The need for officer education to differentiate between illegal modifications and stock loud engines.

The Bigger Picture:

    • While the bill focuses on Woodward Avenue, the issue is statewide.
    • Rep. Price hopes the bill will improve the situation for residents and acknowledges the positive aspects of car shows like the Dream Cruise.
    • The goal is to encourage responsible car ownership and respect for communities.

Or better yet start tonight and use the law that’s already there. Like this one…

Sec. 74-1. – Prohibition generally.

(a)  It shall be unlawful for any person to make, continue or cause to be made or continued any loud, unnecessary or unusual noise or any noise which either annoys, disturbs, injures or endangers the comfort, repose, health, peace or safety of others, within the limits of the city.

(b) Each of the acts enumerated in this chapter is declared unlawful and prohibited, and violators shall be responsible for a municipal civil infraction, but this enumeration shall not be deemed to be exclusive.(Code 1981, § 17-1; Ord. No. O-13-19, § 5, 10-21-2019)

Link to Code

YOU TOO ROYAL OAK

Disorderly Conduct (Disturbing the Peace and Noise)
Ordinance at Section §278-35, First Reading

B. Makes unreasonable noise which tends to cause a public danger, alarm, disorder or nuisance;

P. Vehicle sound equipment noise and vibration. It shall be unlawful for any person to be in possession or control of a parked or moving vehicle with a stereo, disc player, cassette player, speakers, or other similar equipment that is producing sound on a street, driveway, publicly patrolled parking lot or public place at or with a level, volume, intensity, frequency, or other attribute that is perceptible at a distance of 50 feet or more, either by hearing the sound by the human ear or by feeling the sound in the form of vibrations associated therewith. This subsection shall not be applicable to sound emanating from emergency vehicles, vending vehicles, or publicly sponsored or permitted concerts, sporting events, activities, or gatherings. A violation of this subsection is a civil infraction punishable by a fine of $100.
[Added 7-25-2016 by Ord. No. 2016-09]

Q. Loud vehicles. The operation of any automobile, truck, motorcycle or other vehicle so out of repair or so loaded or constructed as to cause loud and unnecessary grating, grinding, rattling or other unreasonable noise, including the noise resulting from exhaust, which is plainly audible at a distance of 50 feet from the vehicle and unreasonably disturbing to the quiet, comfort or repose of other persons. A violation of this subsection is a civil infraction punishable by a fine of $100.
[Added 7-25-2016 by Ord. No. 2016-09]