Michigan Compiled Laws
Mich. Comp. Laws § 38.137 (2026)
Tenure commission; powers.
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
TEACHERS' TENURE
Act 4 of 1937 (Ex. Sess.)
38.137 Tenure commission; powers.
Sec. 7.
The tenure commission is hereby vested with such powers as are necessary to carry out and enforce the provisions of this act.
History: 1937, Ex. Sess., Act 4, Eff. Sept. 1, 1937 ;-- CL 1948, 38.137
PopularName Notes:
Teachers' Tenure ActNotes of Decisions
Cited in 12
cases, 1975–2016 · leading case: Lakeshore Bd. of Educ. v. Grindstaff, 461 N.W.2d 651 (Mich. 1990).
Lakeshore Bd. of Educ. v. Grindstaff, 461 N.W.2d 651 (Mich. 1990). “MCL 38.121; MSA 15.2021. On appeal, the commission acts as a "board of review," MCL 38.”
Chester v. Harper Woods Sch. Dist., 273 N.W.2d 916 (Mich. Ct. App. 1978). “Further, MCL 38.137; MSA 15.2037 vests the tenure commission with such powers as are necessary to carry out and enforce the act's provisions, and MCL 38.”
Ranta v. Eaton Rapids Pub. Schs. Bd. of Educ., 721 N.W.2d 806 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). “” MCL 38.137. Our Supreme Court has warned that the concurrent exercise of jurisdiction by MERC and the STC “could result in competing claims and conflicting adjudications with untoward and costly delay.”
Viera v. Saginaw Bd. of Educ., 283 N.W.2d 796 (Mich. Ct. App. 1979). “On the contrary, my reading of relevant case law convinces me that the circuit court was the more appropriate forum in which to initially raise this pure question of law and statutory interpretation.”
Freiberg v. Bd. of Educ. of Big Bay De Noc Sch. Dist., 232 N.W.2d 718 (Mich. Ct. App. 1975). “’ ” The teacher tenure commission, under MCLA 38.137; MSA 15.2037, is vested with such powers as are necessary to carry out and enforce the provisions of the act.”
Bd. of Educ. Benton Harbor Schs. v. Wolff, 361 N.W.2d 750 (Mich. Ct. App. 1984). “This Court agrees with the general principle prohibiting a teacher’s discharge based on inadequate classroom performance unless the teacher is first notified of and given a reasonable opportunity to correct the deficiency; however, we believe that the "opportunity” must…”
Henderson v. Memphis Cmty. Sch. Dist., 226 N.W.2d 725 (Mich. Ct. App. 1975). “MCLA 38.137; MSA 15.2037. If the commission felt that a formal response was required for it to properly perform its responsibilities, we are not normally disposed to lightly set aside an agency finding in view of the great weight which courts accord to the construction given a…”
Lakeshore Bd. of Educ. v. Grindstaff, 441 N.W.2d 777 (Mich. Ct. App. 1989). “82-69, a case in which the names of the parties were kept private. In general, respondent here has adopted an analysis similar to that in 82-69.”
Farmer v. Holton Pub. Schs., 22 Educ. L. Rep. 362 (Mich. Ct. App. 1981). “The court stated that, while the tenure commission may have legitimate concerns that school boards will use individualized criteria to circumvent the recall provisions of the tenure act, the present system of review was adequate to disclose any improprieties. We agree with the…”
Smith v. Wyoming Pub. Schs. Bd. of Educ., 341 N.W.2d 202 (Mich. Ct. App. 1983). “The tenure commission has jurisdiction to entertain an appeal by a tenured teacher from any decision of a school board: "A teacher who has achieved tenure status may appeal any decision of a controlling board * • MCL 38.”
Amy N Scott v. Niles Cmty. Schs. Bd. of Educ. (Mich. Ct. App. 2016). “We begin our analysis of this issue by noting that the Commission is a quasi-judicial creation of the Legislature without equitable jurisdiction, Bd of Ed of Benton Harbor Area Schs v Wolf, 139 Mich App 148, 155-156 ; 361 NW2d 750 (1984), with powers limited to what is needed to…”
Mary Ruth Clark v. Swartz Creek Cmty. Schs. Bd of Educ. (Mich. 2010). “MCL 38.137; MCL 38.101. A decision of the Tenure Commission must be upheld if there is “competent, material, and substantial evidence on the whole record” to support the Tenure Commission’s findings.”
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.