Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 38 / Act 314 of 1965
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 38.1132 (2026)

Short title; meanings of words and phrases.

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

PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT SYSTEM INVESTMENT ACT


Act 314 of 1965


38.1132 Short title; meanings of words and phrases.

Sec. 12.

    (1)  This act shall be known and may be cited as the "public employee retirement system investment act".

    (2) For the purposes of this act, the words and phrases defined in sections 12a to 12f have the meanings ascribed to them in those sections.

History: Add. 1982, Act 55, Imd. Eff. Apr. 6, 1982 ;-- Am. 1988, Act 127, Imd. Eff. May 24, 1988 ;-- Am. 1996, Act 485, Imd. Eff. Dec. 27, 1996

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1985–2021 · leading case: Bd. of Trs. Police & Firemen Ret. Sys. v. City of Detroit, 373 N.W.2d 173 (Mich. Ct. App. 1985).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bd. of Trs. Police & Firemen Ret. Sys. v. City of Detroit, 373 N.W.2d 173 (Mich. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 4× “The sole legal issue as presented by the trial court and by both parties is whether 1982 PA 55 , MCL 38.1132 et seq.; MSA 3.981(112) et seq.”
Gen. Ret. Sys. of Detroit v. Ubs, Ag, 799 F. Supp. 2d 749 (E.D. Mich. 2011). · cites it 3× “complaint sets forth various common law claims, including breach of contract (Count V), unjust enrichment (Count VII), fraud (Count II), silent fraud (Count IV), innocent/negligent misrepresentation (Count III), breach of fiduciary duty (Count VI), and the right to an accounting…”
Detroit News, Inc. v. Policemen & Firemen Ret. Sys. of City of Detroit, 651 N.W.2d 127 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002). “1140Í, the trial court ruled that subsection 1 “is not applicable to this case because the information sought is not within the scope of ‘financial or proprietary information,’ as defined in MCL 38.”
Wayne Cnty. Employees Ret. Sys v. Charter Cnty. of Wayne, 859 N.W.2d 678 (Mich. 2014). “The retirement system challenged the 2010 ordinance amendment, claiming, inter alia, that the transfer and corresponding ARC offset violated Const 1963, art 9, § 24, and various provisions of the Public Employee Retirement Systems Investment Act (PERSIA), MCL 38.1132 et seq. The…”
Wayne Cnty. Employees Ret. Sys. v. Wayne Cnty., 301 Mich. App. 1 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013). “Plaintiffs argue that the ordinance violates Const 1963, art 9, § 24, and the Public Employee Retirement System Investment Act (PERSIA), MCL 38.1132 et seq. The trial court granted defendants’ motion for summary disposition, rejecting plaintiffs’ constitutional and statutory…”
Birmingham Employees'ret. Sys. v. Comerica Bank, 767 F. Supp. 2d 793 (E.D. Mich. 2011). · cites it 2× “6 Plaintiffs assert instead that the duties imposed on Comerica by Michigan’s Public Employee Retirement System Investment Act (“PERSIA”), Mich. Comp. Laws § 38.1132 et. seq.—which governs the four governmental plans here—are analogous to the duties ERISA imposes on fiduciaries.”
Ernst v. Roberts, 225 F. Supp. 2d 781 (E.D. Mich. 2002). “§§ 38.1132— 38.1140Í. The State Treasurer is required to deposit retirement system funds “in the same manner and subject to the laws governing the deposit of state funds by the state treasurer.”
Beverly a Nicholson-Gracia v. Gen. Ret. Sys. of Detroit (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “The circuit court granted the motion on several grounds, including standing and ripeness, failure to state a valid -1- breach of fiduciary duty claim, governmental immunity, and the expiration of the statute of limitations.”
Beverly a Nicholson-Gracia v. Gen. Ret. Sys. of Detroit (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “The circuit court granted the motion on several grounds, including standing and ripeness, failure to state a valid -1- breach of fiduciary duty claim, governmental immunity, and the expiration of the statute of limitations.”
Daniel Kerber v. Wayne Cnty., Mich. (6th Cir. 2021). “Third, he 6 In this order, the district court did not rely solely on the contractual language, but provided three additional state law justifications: (1) WCAA had failed to conduct a study “of the long term effects of the pension as required by MCL 38.1132,” (2) WCAA and Kerber…”
Daniel Kerber v. Wayne Cnty., Mich. (6th Cir. 2021). “Third, he 6 In this order, the district court did not rely solely on the contractual language, but provided three additional state law justifications: (1) WCAA had failed to conduct a study “of the long term effects of the pension as required by MCL 38.1132,” (2) WCAA and Kerber…”
Kerber v. Wayne Cnty. (E.D. Mich. 2020). “The audit found 1) the employer never undertook a study of the long term effects of the pension as required by MCL 38.1132, 2) WCERS was never provided with a copy of the severance agreement, and 3) no labor group had been offered a similar option to transfer into Plan One, as…”
Show all 14 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.