Michigan
For Michigan, presumption period is 90 days; what the presumption does is a presumption in favor of the defense of retaliatory termination arises; example of a protected activity is That the alleged termination was intended primarily as a penalty for the defendant's complaint to a governmental authority with a report of plaintiff's violation of a health or safety code or ordinance; statute is MCL 600.5720, recorded from its source on 2026-09-02.
- State
- Michigan our reading
- Presumption period
- 90 days verified
- What the presumption does
- a presumption in favor of the defense of retaliatory termination arises verified
- Example of a protected activity
- That the alleged termination was intended primarily as a penalty for the defendant's complaint to a governmental authority with a report of plaintiff's violation of a health or safety code or ordinance verified
- Statute
- MCL 600.5720 our reading
Values marked our reading are our classification of what the source says — the source does not print them in those words. The quote below is the evidence for each one; judge it yourself.
What the source says
(2) If a defendant who alleges a retaliatory termination of the tenancy shows that within 90 days before the commencement of summary proceedings the defendant attempted to secure or enforce rights against the plaintiff or to complain against the plaintiff, as provided in subsection (1)(a), (b), (c), or (e), by means of official action to or through a court or other governmental agency and the official action has not resulted in dismissal or denial of the attempt or complaint, a presumption in favor of the defense of retaliatory termination arises, unless the plaintiff establishes by a preponderance of the evidence that the termination of tenancy was not in retaliation for the acts.
— legislature.mi.gov, retrieved 2026-09-02
Where each value comes from
The value above is stated away from the sentence quoted with the answer, so the passage that states it is shown here too.
Example of a protected activity
(b) That the alleged termination was intended primarily as a penalty for the defendant's complaint to a governmental authority with a report of plaintiff's violation of a health or safety code or ordinance.
— all from legislature.mi.gov, retrieved 2026-09-02
Source
- legislature.mi.govhttps://www.legislature.mi.gov/Laws/MCL?objectName=MCL-600-5720