Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 15 / Act 196 of 1973
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 15.341 (2026)

Definitions.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

STANDARDS OF CONDUCT FOR PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES


Act 196 of 1973


15.341 Definitions.

Sec. 1.

    As used in this act:

    (a) "Board" means the board of ethics.

    (b) "Employee" means an employee, classified or unclassified, of the executive branch of this state. For the purpose of section 2b, employee shall include an employee of this state or a political subdivision of this state.

    (c) "Public officer" means a person appointed by the governor or another executive department official. For the purpose of section 2b, public officer shall include an elected or appointed official of this state or a political subdivision of this state.

    (d) "Unethical conduct" means a violation of the standards in section 2.

History: 1973, Act 196, Imd. Eff. Jan. 8, 1974 ;-- Am. 1980, Act 481, Eff. Mar. 31, 1981

Compiler's Notes:

    Section 191 of Act 227 of the Public Acts of 1975 repealed MCL 4.401 to 4.410, 168.901 to 168.929, 15.321 to 15.330, 15.301 to 15.310, and 15.341 to 15.348. The Michigan Supreme Court, however, in Advisory Opinion on Constitutionality of 1975 PA 227, 396 Mich. 123, 240 N.W.2d 193 (1976), held Act 227 of the Public Acts of 1975 unconstitutional for being in violation of Mich. Const., Art. 4, § 24.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1989–2026 · leading case: Jocham v. Tuscola Cnty., 239 F. Supp. 2d 714 (E.D. Mich. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Jocham v. Tuscola Cnty., 239 F. Supp. 2d 714 (E.D. Mich. 2003). · cites it 4× “, the Standards of Conduct for Public Officers and Employees, Mich. Comp. Laws § 15.341 et seq., Conflict of Interest, Mich.”
Forster v. Delton Sch. Dist., 440 N.W.2d 421 (Mich. Ct. App. 1989). “; and (Count v) standards of conduct for public officers and employees act, MCL 15.341 et seq.; *584 MSA 4.1700(71) et seq.”
Detroit Area Agency on Aging v. Off. of Servs. to the Aging, 534 N.W.2d 229 (Mich. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “, and the state ethics act, MCL 15.341 et seq.; MSA 4.1700(71) et seq.”
Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Kulling, 475 N.W.2d 464 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991). “MCL 15.341 et seq.; MSA 4.1700(71) et seq.”
Bruce D Serven v. Health Quest Chiropractic Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “Boonstra 3 The state ethics act, MCL 15.341 et seq., does permit an aggrieved party to file a civil suit for damages.”
Thomas D Esordi v. MacOmb Twp. (Mich. Ct. App. 2025). “The new board members who testified indicated that they voted in favor of dissolving the dual position based on the potential for conflicts of interest between the jobs of general counsel and HR Director. Plaintiff’s initial complaint alleged violation of the WPA, violation of…”
Mark Andrews v. State Police (Mich. Ct. App. 2026). “The sole issue before this Court was “whether that part of the standards of conduct act allowing public employees to sue in circuit court for violation of the act is unconstitutional as applied to state-classified civil servants.”
Robert Davis v. Roy Roberts (Mich. 2012). “330, as a public servant; MCL 15.341 to l5.348, as a public officer; and MCL 15.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 15.341(c) — 1 case
Bruce D Serven v. Health Quest Chiropractic Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “Boonstra 3 The state ethics act, MCL 15.341 et seq., does permit an aggrieved party to file a civil suit for damages.”
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.