Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 15.342b (2026)

Report of violation; applicability of sanctions; civil fine.

✓ 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

15.342b Report of violation; applicability of sanctions; civil fine.

Sec. 2b.

(1) A public officer or employee who has knowledge that another public officer or employee has violated section 2 may report the existence of the violation to a supervisor, person, agency, or organization. A public officer or employee who reports or is about to report a violation of section 2 shall not be subject to any of the following sanctions because they reported or were about to report a violation of section 2.

(a) Dismissal from employment or office.

(b) Withholding of salary increases that are ordinarily forthcoming to the employee.

(d) Demotion in employment status.

(e) Transfer of employment location.

(2) Whenever a public officer or employee who has reported or who intends to report a violation of section 2 may be subject to any of the sanctions under this section for reasons other than the public officer's or employee's actions in reporting or intending to report a violation of section 2, the appointing or supervisory authority before the imposition of a sanction shall establish by a preponderance of evidence that the sanction to be imposed is not imposed because the public officer or employee reported or intended to report a violation of section 2.

(3) A person who violates this section is liable for a civil fine of not more than $500.00.

(4) A civil fine recovered under this section shall be submitted to the state treasurer for deposit in the general fund of this state.

History: Add. 1978, Act 352, Imd. Eff. July 12, 1978 ;-- 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Section 191 of Act 227 of the Public Acts of 1975 repealed MCL 4.401 to 4.410, 168.901 to 168.929, 15.321 to 15.330, 15.301 to 15.310, and 15.341 to 15.348.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 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1991–2026 · leading case: Lash v. City of Traverse City, 735 N.W.2d 628 (Mich. 2007).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Lash v. City of Traverse City, 735 N.W.2d 628 (Mich. 2007). · cites it 2× “273 (permitting the recovery of up to $500 in damages against a public official for intentional violation of the act); the standards of conduct, MCL 15.”

Shimkus v. Hickner, 417 F. Supp. 2d 884 (E.D. Mich. 2006). · cites it 2× “That statute states that a public employee may report a violation of the Standards of Conduct of Public Officers and Employees Act and “shall not be subject to [certain] sanctions because they reported or were about to report a violation.”

Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Kulling, 475 N.W.2d 464 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991). “[MCL 15.342b; MSA 4.1700(72b).] Section 2c states in part: (1) A person who alleges a violation of section 2b may bring a civil action .”

Mark Andrews v. State Police (Mich. Ct. App. 2026). “Kulling has the opportunity to present his claim of retaliatory discharge to the commission and can pursue it through the appellate 2 MCL 15.342b prohibits the dismissal of an employee who reports violations of the act, while another section provides a cause of action and…”

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.