Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 35 / Act 205 of 1897
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 35.403 (2026)

Violation of act; penalty.

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

PREFERENCE IN EMPLOYMENT


Act 205 of 1897


35.403 Violation of act; penalty.

Sec. 3.

    A violation of any of the provisions of this act, by a person having the power of appointment to a position, under him, in either of the departments mentioned in section 1, shall be deemed a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof in any court of competent jurisdiction shall be punished by a fine of not less than 50 dollars, and not more than 100 dollars, or by imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed 90 days or by both such fine and imprisonment in the discretion of the court.

History: 1897, Act 205, Eff. Aug. 30, 1897 ;-- CL 1897, 1692 ;-- Am. 1899, Act 85, Imd. Eff. May 25, 1899 ;-- Am. 1907, Act 329, Eff. Sept. 28, 1907 ;-- CL 1915, 1043 ;-- CL 1929, 902 ;-- CL 1948, 35.403

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1993–2025 · leading case: People v. Spann, 655 N.W.2d 251 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Spann, 655 N.W.2d 251 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002). “, MCL 35.403, 66.8, 430.55, 750.220, 801.2.”
Charles Vayda v. Cnty. of Lake, 909 N.W.2d 874 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “30a of the CBCA, which states, in part, the following: (1) A member of the county board of commissioners of any county shall not be eligible to receive, or shall not receive, an appointment from, or be employed by an officer, board, committee, or other authority of that county…”
People v. Spann, 668 N.W.2d 904 (Mich. 2003). “§ 35.403, M.C.L. § 66.8 and M.C.L. § 430.”
In Re Grant, 645 N.W.2d 79 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002). “As we stated in Jackson, supra at 177: [T]he remedy the VPA provides for a violation of the right to notice and a hearing is not automatic reinstatement with back pay. Because plaintiff was demoted without a hearing, he was required to file a written protest with the mayor or he…”
Jackson v. Detroit Police Chief, 506 N.W.2d 251 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993). “See MCL 35.403; MSA 4.1223. However, the remedy the vpa provides for a violation of the right to notice and a hearing is not automatic reinstatement with back pay.”
20250211_C363718_72_363718.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “Defendants argue that plaintiff could not claim the protections of the VPA because he was a “first deputy” to the city manager. Under MCL 35.”
Charles Vayda v. Cnty. of Lake (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “Further, MCL 35.403 states that failing to provide notice and a hearing in violation of the VPA subjects the offender to criminal prosecution.”
Potter v. Harbor Springs, City of (W.D. Mich. 2025). “Laws §§ 35.403, 35.404. Sinadinoski and Mayor Bugera, on the other hand, had control over Potter’s employment with the City.”
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.