Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 37 / Act 220 of 1976
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.1101 (2026)

Short title.

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

PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES CIVIL RIGHTS ACT


Act 220 of 1976


37.1101 Short title.

Sec. 101.

    This act shall be known and may be cited as the "persons with disabilities civil rights act".

History: 1976, Act 220, Eff. Mar. 31, 1977 ;-- Am. 1998, Act 20, Imd. Eff. Mar. 12, 1998

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 415 cases (97 in the last 5 years), 1979–2026 · leading case: Peden v. City of Detroit, 680 N.W.2d 857 (Mich. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Peden v. City of Detroit, 680 N.W.2d 857 (Mich. 2004). · cites it 4× “, and the Michigan Persons with Disabilities Civil Rights Act (PWDCRA), MCL 37.1101 et seq.; and (2) whether plaintiff, who suffers from a permanent heart condition, has presented prima facie evidence that he is able to perform the essential functions of this position.”
Michalski v. Bar-Levav, 625 N.W.2d 754 (Mich. 2001). · cites it 4× “[1] MCL 37.1101 et seq.; MSA 3.550(101) et seq.”
Timko v. Oakwood Custom Coating, Inc, 625 N.W.2d 101 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 4× “§ 37.1101 et seq.; MSA 3.550(101) et seq.”
Garg v. MacOmb Cnty. Cmty. Mental Health Servs., 696 N.W.2d 646 (Mich. 2005). · cites it 2× “§ 37.1101 et seq. This Court adopted the Evans requirement that an employee must first demonstrate that a violation has taken place within the limitations period.”
Marilyn Froling Revocable Living Trust v. Bloomfield Hills Country Club, 769 N.W.2d 234 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “, and the Persons With Disabilities Civil Rights Act, MCL 37.1101 et seq. " [24] Therefore, the Froling Trust argues, Garg was a limited decision and does not apply to bar this present cause of action for nuisance and trespass.”
Chmielewski v. Xermac, Inc, 580 N.W.2d 817 (Mich. 1998). · cites it 4× “§ 37.1101 et seq.; M.S.A. § 3.550(101) et seq.”
Middlebrooks v. Wayne Cnty., 521 N.W.2d 774 (Mich. 1994). · cites it 4× “, and the Handicappers' Civil Rights Act, MCL 37.1101 et seq. ; MSA 3.550(101) et seq.”
Beals v. Michigan, 871 N.W.2d 5 (Mich. 2015). · cites it 3× “Plaintiff accused the state of violating the Persons with Disabilities Civil Rights Act (PDCRA), MCL 37.1101 et seq., and accused Harman of gross negligence.”
in Re Bradley Est., 835 N.W.2d 545 (Mich. 2013). · cites it 2× “11 contemnors, the Legislature has waived any claim that they are immune from contempt liability.”
Johnnie F Shinholster v. Annapolis Hosp, 471 Mich. 540 (Mich. 2004). · cites it 2× “25 Handicappers Civil Rights Act, MCL 37.1101, which are also written in the present tense, yet holding that the “present” tense refers to events existing during the pendency of the plaintiff’s employment, when her cause of action arose), but it also avoids the arguably…”
MacDonald v. PKT, INC., 628 N.W.2d 33 (Mich. 2001). · cites it 2× “§ 37.1101 et seq., by failing to adequately accommodate his disability.”
Feyz v. Mercy Mem'l Hosp., 719 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 2006). · cites it 2× “[7] Because this case was decided on motion solely on the basis of plaintiff's pleadings, it is not clear whether the ad hoc investigatory committee and the executive committee were duly authorized "peer review" entities. It is not necessary to the resolution of this appeal that…”
Show all 415 citing cases →
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.