Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.1502 (2026)

Owners, persons engaging in real estate transactions, real estate brokers, and real estate salesmen; prohibited conduct.

✓ 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


37.1502 Owners, persons engaging in real estate transactions, real estate brokers, and real estate salesmen; prohibited conduct.

Sec. 502.

    (1) An owner or any other person engaging in a real estate transaction, or a real estate broker or salesman shall not, on the basis of a disability of a buyer or renter, of a person residing in or intending to reside in a dwelling after it is sold, rented, or made available, or of any person associated with that buyer or renter, that is unrelated to the individual's ability to acquire, rent, or maintain property or use by an individual of adaptive devices or aids:

    (a) Refuse to engage in a real estate transaction with a person.

    (b) Discriminate against a person in the terms, conditions, or privileges of a real estate transaction or in the furnishing of facilities or services in connection with a real estate transaction.

    (c) Refuse to receive or fail to transmit a bona fide offer to engage in a real estate transaction from a person.

    (d) Refuse to negotiate for a real estate transaction with a person.

    (e) Represent to a person that real property is not available for inspection, sale, rental, or lease when in fact it is available, fail to bring a property listing to a person's attention, refuse to permit a person to inspect real property, or otherwise deny or make real property unavailable to a person.

    (f) Make, print, circulate, post, or mail or cause to be made or published a statement, advertisement, or sign, or use a form of application for a real estate transaction, or make a record of inquiry in connection with a prospective real estate transaction, which indicates, directly or indirectly, an intent to make a limitation, specification, or discrimination with respect to a real estate transaction.

    (g) Offer, solicit, accept, use, or retain a listing of real property with the understanding that a person may be discriminated against in a real estate transaction or in the furnishing of facilities or services in connection with a real estate transaction.

    (h) Discriminate against a person in the brokering or appraising of real property.

    (2) A person shall not deny a person access to or membership or participation in a multiple listing service, real estate brokers' organization or other service, organization, or facility relating to the business of selling or renting real property, or discriminate against a person in the terms or conditions of that access, membership, or participation.

History: 1976, Act 220, Eff. Mar. 31, 1977 ;-- Am. 1992, Act 123, Imd. Eff. June 29, 1992 ;-- Am. 1998, Act 20, Imd. Eff. Mar. 12, 1998

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1982–2025 · leading case: Bachman v. Swan Harbour Assocs., 653 N.W.2d 415 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002).
Bachman v. Swan Harbour Assocs., 653 N.W.2d 415 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 3× “1506a, (2) defendants actively discriminated against him on the basis of his disability or because of his use of adaptive devices, MCL 37.1502, and (3) defendants retaliated against him for asserting his *413 rights under the pwdcra, MCL 37.”
Schanz v. Vill. Apts., 998 F. Supp. 784 (E.D. Mich. 1998). “§ 37.1502. On or about October 11, 1996, this court dismissed the MHCRA claim without prejudice.”
Frazier v. City of Grand Ledge, MI, 135 F. Supp. 2d 845 (W.D. Mich. 2001). “§ 37.1502(1) (1999). The MPDA defines “real estate broker or salesman” as a “person .”
Armstrong v. Senior Citizens Hous. of Ann Arbor, Inc, 317 N.W.2d 255 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 6× “MCL 37.1502, 37.1606; MSA 3.550(502), 3.550(606).”
Est. of Robert J Romig v. Boulder Bluff Condos. (Mich. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 5× “MCL 37.1502 prohibits certain discriminatory acts and provides in relevant part as follows: (1) An owner or any other person engaging in a real estate transaction, or a real estate broker or salesman shall not, on the basis of a disability of a buyer or renter, of a person…”
O Est. of Robert J Romig v. Boulder Bluff Condos. (Mich. Ct. App. 2022). “As we explained in our previous opinion, the merits of plaintiffs’ PWDCRA claims are dubious because plaintiffs must be able to show that the alleged discrimination occurred in the context of a “real estate transaction.”
Mercer v. Edward Rose & Sons, Inc. d/b/a The Crossings Apts. (E.D. Mich. 2023). “Laws § 37.1502 . When there is no direct evidence of discrimination, the claims are analyzed under the burden-shifting framework articulated in McDonnell Douglas Corp.”
Fair Hous. Ctr. of Metro. Detroit v. Am. House Grosse Pointe, LLC (E.D. Mich. 2023). “§ 37.1502. In determining whether a statement is unlawful under § 3604(c), courts consider whether the statement indicates to an objective “ordinary listener” a preference, limitation, or discrimination based upon a protected class.”
Joseph Kuilema v. Calvin Univ. (Mich. Ct. App. 2025). “See MCL 37.1502(1) (prohibiting housing discrimination “on the basis of a disability of a buyer or renter, .”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.1502(1) — 2 cases
Frazier v. City of Grand Ledge, MI, 135 F. Supp. 2d 845 (W.D. Mich. 2001). “§ 37.1502(1) (1999). The MPDA defines “real estate broker or salesman” as a “person .”
Joseph Kuilema v. Calvin Univ. (Mich. Ct. App. 2025). “See MCL 37.1502(1) (prohibiting housing discrimination “on the basis of a disability of a buyer or renter, .”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 37.1502(1)(b) — 1 case
Est. of Robert J Romig v. Boulder Bluff Condos. (Mich. Ct. App. 2020). “MCL 37.1502 prohibits certain discriminatory acts and provides in relevant part as follows: (1) An owner or any other person engaging in a real estate transaction, or a real estate broker or salesman shall not, on the basis of a disability of a buyer or renter, of a person…”
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.