Chapter 5: Defenses to Summary Proceedings
5.1Introduction1
In Michigan, summary proceedings and other actions relating to leases are to be treated “in the same manner as [] any other matter involving a duly executed contract.” Rome v Walker, 38 Mich App 458, 463 (1972). “Summary proceedings for dispossessing an occupant of premises are purely statutory. . . . To be valid the statutory requirements and limitations set must be strictly observed and complied with.” Gregor v Old, 209 Mich 43, 49 (1920). See also 11A Michigan Pleading & Practice (2d ed), § 88:3.
A landlord has the burden of proving his or her right to possession of the premises. Rathnaw v Hatch, 281 Mich 402, 404 (1937). A tenant has the burden of proving any defenses raised, “either as a counterclaim or as an affirmative defense.” See MCR 2.507(B)(2). The quantum of proof required in civil cases is a preponderance of the evidence. Miller-Davis Co v Ahrens Const, Inc (On Remand), 296 Mich App 56, 71 (2012).