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

Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.1210 (2026)

Burden of proof; cost of accommodation as undue hardship; reduction of limitations; restructuring job or altering schedule; applicability of subsections (2) to (16); violation; notices.

✓ 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


37.1210 Burden of proof; cost of accommodation as undue hardship; reduction of limitations; restructuring job or altering schedule; applicability of subsections (2) to (16); violation; notices.

Sec. 210.

    (1) In an action brought pursuant to this article for a failure to accommodate, the person with a disability shall bear the burden of proof. If the person with a disability proves a prima facie case, the person shall bear the burden of producing evidence that an accommodation would impose an undue hardship on that person. If the person produces evidence that an accommodation would impose an undue hardship on that person, the person with a disability shall bear the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that an accommodation would not impose an undue hardship on that person.

    (2) Except as provided in subsections (7), (13), and (17), if the person employs fewer than 4 employees and is required under this article to purchase any equipment or device to accommodate the person with a disability, the total purchase cost required to be paid by that person for that equipment or device is limited to an amount equal to the state average weekly wage. If the cost of an accommodation under this subsection exceeds the limitation established for that accommodation, the accommodation imposes an undue hardship on that person. If the cost of the accommodation does not exceed the limitation established for that accommodation, the accommodation does not impose an undue hardship on that person.

    (3) Except as provided in subsections (7), (13), and (17), if the person employs 4 or more employees but fewer than 15 employees and is required under this article to purchase any equipment or device to accommodate the person with a disability, the total purchase cost required to be paid by that person is limited to an amount equal to 1.5 times the state average weekly wage. If the cost of an accommodation under this subsection exceeds the limitation established for that accommodation, the accommodation imposes an undue hardship on that person. If the cost of the accommodation does not exceed the limitation established for that accommodation, the accommodation does not impose an undue hardship on that person.

    (4) Except as provided in subsections (6), (7), (13), and (17), if the person employs 15 or more employees but fewer than 25 employees and is required under this article to purchase any equipment or device to accommodate the person with a disability, the total purchase cost required to be paid by that person is limited to an amount equal to 2.5 times the state average weekly wage. If the cost of an accommodation under this subsection exceeds the limitation established for that accommodation, the accommodation imposes an undue hardship on that person. If the cost of the accommodation does not exceed the limitation established for that accommodation, the accommodation does not impose an undue hardship on that person.

    (5) Except as provided in subsections (6), (7), (13), and (17), if the person employs 25 or more employees and the total purchase cost of any equipment or device required to accommodate an employee under this article is equal to or less than 2.5 times the state average weekly wage, the accommodation does not impose an undue hardship on that person.

    (6) Except as provided in subsections (7), (13), and (17), if the person employs 15 or more employees and the total purchase cost of any equipment or device required to accommodate an employee under this article is equal to or less than 2.5 times the state average weekly wage, the accommodation does not impose an undue hardship on that person.

    (7) Subsections (2) to (6) do not limit the cost of reasonable routine maintenance or repair of equipment or devices needed to accommodate a person with a disability under this article.

    (8) Except as provided in subsections (13) and (17), if the person employs fewer than 4 employees and is required to hire or retain 1 or more individuals as readers or interpreters to accommodate the person with a disability in performing the duties of his or her job, the cost required to be paid by that person is limited to an amount equal to 7 times the state average weekly wage for the first year the person with a disability is hired, promoted, or transferred to that job, and 5 times the state average weekly wage for each year after the first year the person with a disability is hired, promoted, or transferred to that job. If the cost of an accommodation under this subsection exceeds the limitation established for that accommodation, the accommodation imposes an undue hardship on that person. If the cost of the accommodation does not exceed the limitation established for that accommodation, the accommodation does not impose an undue hardship on that person.

    (9) Except as provided in subsections (13) and (17), if the person employs 4 or more employees but fewer than 15 employees and is required to hire or retain 1 or more individuals as readers or interpreters to accommodate the person with a disability in performing the duties of his or her job, the cost required to be paid by that person is limited to an amount equal to 10 times the state average weekly wage for the first year the person with a disability is hired, promoted, or transferred to that job, and 7 times the state average weekly wage for each year after the first year the person with a disability is hired, promoted, or transferred to that job. If the cost of an accommodation under this subsection exceeds the limitation established for that accommodation, the accommodation imposes an undue hardship on that person. If the cost of the accommodation does not exceed the limitation established for that accommodation, the accommodation does not impose an undue hardship on that person.

    (10) Except as provided in subsections (12), (13), and (17), if the person employs 15 or more employees but fewer than 25 employees and is required to hire or retain 1 or more individuals as readers or interpreters to accommodate the person with a disability in performing the duties of his or her job, the cost required to be paid by that person is limited to an amount equal to 15 times the state average weekly wage for the first year the person with a disability is hired, promoted, or transferred to that job, and 10 times the state average weekly wage for each year after the first year the person with a disability is hired, promoted, or transferred to that job. If the cost of an accommodation under this subsection exceeds the limitation established for that accommodation, the accommodation imposes an undue hardship on that person. If the cost of the accommodation does not exceed the limitation established for that accommodation, the accommodation does not impose an undue hardship on that person.

    (11) Except as provided in subsections (12), (13), and (17), if the person employs 25 or more employees and the cost required to hire or retain 1 or more individuals as readers or interpreters to accommodate the person with a disability in performing the duties of his or her job is less than or equal to 15 times the state average weekly wage for the first year the person with a disability is hired, promoted, or transferred to that job, and is less than or equal to 10 times the state average weekly wage for each year after the first year the person with a disability is hired, promoted, or transferred to that job, the accommodation does not impose an undue hardship on that person.

    (12)  Except as provided in subsections (13) and (17), if the person employs 15 or more employees and the cost required to hire or retain 1 or more individuals as readers or interpreters to accommodate the person with a disability in performing the duties of his or her job is less than or equal to 15 times the state average weekly wage for the first year the person with a disability is hired, promoted, or transferred to that job, and is less than or equal to 10 times the state average weekly wage for each year after the first year the person with a disability is hired, promoted, or transferred to that job, the accommodation does not impose an undue hardship on that person.

    (13) If the person with a disability is a temporary employee, the limitations established for accommodations under subsections (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (8), (9), (10), (11), and (12) are reduced by 50%.

    (14) A person who employs fewer than 15 employees is not required to restructure a job or alter the schedule of employees as an accommodation under this article.

    (15) Job restructuring and altering the schedule of employees under this article applies only to minor or infrequent duties relating to the particular job held by the person with a disability.

    (16) If a person can accommodate a person with a disability under this article only by purchasing equipment or devices and hiring or retaining 1 or more individuals as readers or interpreters, the person shall, subject to subsections (2) to (13) and subsection (17), purchase the equipment or devices and hire or retain 1 or more individuals as readers or interpreters to accommodate that person with a disability. However, if the person can accommodate that person with a disability by purchasing equipment or devices or by hiring or retaining 1 or more individuals as readers or interpreters, the person shall consult the person with a disability and, subject to subsections (2) to (13) and subsection (17), choose whether to purchase equipment or devices or hire or retain 1 or more individuals as readers or interpreters.

    (17) Subsections (2) to (16) do not apply to either of the following:

    (a) A public employer. As used in this subdivision, "public employer" means this state or a political subdivision of this state.

    (b) An organization exempt from taxation under section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code of 1986.

    (18) A person with a disability may allege a violation against a person regarding a failure to accommodate under this article only if the person with a disability notifies the person in writing of the need for accommodation within 182 days after the date the person with a disability knew or reasonably should have known that an accommodation was needed.

    (19) A person shall post notices or use other appropriate means to provide all employees and job applicants with notice of the requirements of subsection (18).

History: Add. 1990, Act 121, Imd. Eff. June 25, 1990 ;-- Am. 1998, Act 20, Imd. Eff. Mar. 12, 1998

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 38 cases (13 in the last 5 years), 1994–2026 · leading case: Rourk v. Oakwood Hosp. Corp., 580 N.W.2d 397 (Mich. 1998).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Rourk v. Oakwood Hosp. Corp., 580 N.W.2d 397 (Mich. 1998). · cites it 22× “§ 37.1210; M.S.A. § 3.550(210). It specifically recognizes the following types of accommodation: (1) purchasing equipment and devices, (2) reasonable routine maintenance or repair of such equipment and devices, (3) hiring readers and interpreters, and (4) restructuring jobs and…”
Bageris v. Brandon Twp., 691 N.W.2d 459 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 8× “MCL 37.1210(1). In light of that and applying common sense, we conclude that an employee cannot satisfy the written notice requirement of MCL 37.”
Bachman v. Swan Harbour Assocs., 653 N.W.2d 415 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 3× “at 32-33, the Supreme Court examined the pwdcra and determined that specific duties set forth in MCL 37.1210 of the employment article of the pwdcra defined the general duty to accommodate under MCL 37.”
Demyanovich v. Cadon Plating & Coatings, L.L.C., 747 F.3d 419 (6th Cir. 2014). “Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.1210 (18). Because Demya-novich never presented a formal request for accommodation, his PWDCRA claim would have failed if he had not presented evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude that he was able to work without accommodation.”
Sherman v. Optical Imaging Sys., Inc., 843 F. Supp. 1168 (E.D. Mich. 1994). · cites it 3× “§ 37.1210 (establishing which accommodations pose undue burdens).”
Fritz v. Mascotech Auto. Sys. Grp., Inc., 914 F. Supp. 1481 (E.D. Mich. 1996). · cites it 4× “Mich.Comp.Laws § 37.1210(18). In addition, the MHCRA expressly provides that the employee bears the burden of proof in a claim of failure to accommodate, and that such a claim will be defeated unless the employee successfully rebuts evidence from the employer indicating that a…”
Hall v. Hackley Hosp., 532 N.W.2d 893 (Mich. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 3× “550(102)(2) provides: Except as otherwise provided in article 2, a person shall accommodate a handicapper for purposes of employment, public accommodation, public service, education, or housing unless the person demonstrates that the accommodation would impose an undue hardship.”
John Aldini v. Kroger Co. of Mich., 628 F. App'x 347 (6th Cir. 2015). “2d 394, 398-99 (2000) (citing Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.1210 (18)). In certain situations, a re *351 quest for accommodation can be inferred by context.”
Mauro v. Borgess Med. Ctr., 886 F. Supp. 1349 (W.D. Mich. 1995). · cites it 2× “Section 210 sets forth standards for determining whether the hardship posed by accommodation is “undue.”
Sanchez v. Lagoudakis, 581 N.W.2d 257 (Mich. 1998). · cites it 2× “§ 37.1210(18); M.S.A. § 3.550(210)(18), added by the Legislature in 1990, which provide that a handicapper may not bring a civil action for failure to accommodate unless the employer is first informed of the need for accommodation.”
Plumb v. Abbott Labs., 60 F. Supp. 2d 642 (E.D. Mich. 1999). · cites it 3× “Section 37.1210(18) requires that a plaintiff give timely written notice of a need for accommodation before liability for the failure to provide such an accommodation arises under the statute: (18) A person with a disability may allege a violation against a person regarding a…”
Petzold v. Borman’s, Inc, 617 N.W.2d 394 (Mich. Ct. App. 2000). “[MCL 37.1210(18); MSA 3.550(210)(18) (emphasis added).”
Show all 38 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.1210(1) — 7 cases
Rourk v. Oakwood Hosp. Corp., 580 N.W.2d 397 (Mich. 1998). “§ 37.1210; M.S.A. § 3.550(210). It specifically recognizes the following types of accommodation: (1) purchasing equipment and devices, (2) reasonable routine maintenance or repair of such equipment and devices, (3) hiring readers and interpreters, and (4) restructuring jobs and…”
Fritz v. Mascotech Auto. Sys. Grp., Inc., 914 F. Supp. 1481 (E.D. Mich. 1996). “Mich.Comp.Laws § 37.1210(18). In addition, the MHCRA expressly provides that the employee bears the burden of proof in a claim of failure to accommodate, and that such a claim will be defeated unless the employee successfully rebuts evidence from the employer indicating that a…”
Hall v. Hackley Hosp., 532 N.W.2d 893 (Mich. Ct. App. 1995). “550(102)(2) provides: Except as otherwise provided in article 2, a person shall accommodate a handicapper for purposes of employment, public accommodation, public service, education, or housing unless the person demonstrates that the accommodation would impose an undue hardship.”
Bageris v. Brandon Twp., 691 N.W.2d 459 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). “MCL 37.1210(1). In light of that and applying common sense, we conclude that an employee cannot satisfy the written notice requirement of MCL 37.”
Pernak v. Ashland, Inc., 330 F. Supp. 2d 890 (E.D. Mich. 2004).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.1210(14) — 1 case
Rourk v. Oakwood Hosp. Corp., 580 N.W.2d 397 (Mich. 1998). “§ 37.1210; M.S.A. § 3.550(210). It specifically recognizes the following types of accommodation: (1) purchasing equipment and devices, (2) reasonable routine maintenance or repair of such equipment and devices, (3) hiring readers and interpreters, and (4) restructuring jobs and…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.1210(15) — 3 cases
Pernak v. Ashland, Inc., 330 F. Supp. 2d 890 (E.D. Mich. 2004).
Backer v. Wyeth-Ayerst Labs., 949 F. Supp. 512 (W.D. Mich. 1996).
Picard v. Costco Wholesale Corp. (E.D. Mich. 2022).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.1210(17)(a) — 1 case
Rourk v. Oakwood Hosp. Corp., 580 N.W.2d 397 (Mich. 1998). “§ 37.1210; M.S.A. § 3.550(210). It specifically recognizes the following types of accommodation: (1) purchasing equipment and devices, (2) reasonable routine maintenance or repair of such equipment and devices, (3) hiring readers and interpreters, and (4) restructuring jobs and…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.1210(17)(b) — 1 case
Mauro v. Borgess Med. Ctr., 886 F. Supp. 1349 (W.D. Mich. 1995). “Section 210 sets forth standards for determining whether the hardship posed by accommodation is “undue.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.1210(18) — 13 cases
Bageris v. Brandon Twp., 691 N.W.2d 459 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). “MCL 37.1210(1). In light of that and applying common sense, we conclude that an employee cannot satisfy the written notice requirement of MCL 37.”
Sherman v. Optical Imaging Sys., Inc., 843 F. Supp. 1168 (E.D. Mich. 1994). “§ 37.1210 (establishing which accommodations pose undue burdens).”
Bachman v. Swan Harbour Assocs., 653 N.W.2d 415 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002). “at 32-33, the Supreme Court examined the pwdcra and determined that specific duties set forth in MCL 37.1210 of the employment article of the pwdcra defined the general duty to accommodate under MCL 37.”
Fritz v. Mascotech Auto. Sys. Grp., Inc., 914 F. Supp. 1481 (E.D. Mich. 1996). “Mich.Comp.Laws § 37.1210(18). In addition, the MHCRA expressly provides that the employee bears the burden of proof in a claim of failure to accommodate, and that such a claim will be defeated unless the employee successfully rebuts evidence from the employer indicating that a…”
Sanchez v. Lagoudakis, 581 N.W.2d 257 (Mich. 1998). “§ 37.1210(18); M.S.A. § 3.550(210)(18), added by the Legislature in 1990, which provide that a handicapper may not bring a civil action for failure to accommodate unless the employer is first informed of the need for accommodation.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.1210(19) — 4 cases
Bageris v. Brandon Twp., 691 N.W.2d 459 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). “MCL 37.1210(1). In light of that and applying common sense, we conclude that an employee cannot satisfy the written notice requirement of MCL 37.”
Poplar v. Genesee Cnty. Road Comm'n (E.D. Mich. 2023).
Poplar v. Genesee Cnty. Road Comm'n (E.D. Mich. 2024).
Donna Poplar v. Genesee Cnty. Road Comm'n (6th Cir. 2025).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.1210(2) — 2 cases
Rourk v. Oakwood Hosp. Corp., 580 N.W.2d 397 (Mich. 1998). “§ 37.1210; M.S.A. § 3.550(210). It specifically recognizes the following types of accommodation: (1) purchasing equipment and devices, (2) reasonable routine maintenance or repair of such equipment and devices, (3) hiring readers and interpreters, and (4) restructuring jobs and…”
Picard v. Costco Wholesale Corp. (E.D. Mich. 2022).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.1210(2X5) — 1 case
Hall v. Hackley Hosp., 532 N.W.2d 893 (Mich. Ct. App. 1995). “550(102)(2) provides: Except as otherwise provided in article 2, a person shall accommodate a handicapper for purposes of employment, public accommodation, public service, education, or housing unless the person demonstrates that the accommodation would impose an undue hardship.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.1210(8) — 1 case
Rourk v. Oakwood Hosp. Corp., 580 N.W.2d 397 (Mich. 1998). “§ 37.1210; M.S.A. § 3.550(210). It specifically recognizes the following types of accommodation: (1) purchasing equipment and devices, (2) reasonable routine maintenance or repair of such equipment and devices, (3) hiring readers and interpreters, and (4) restructuring jobs 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.