Mich. Comp. Laws § 380.1586

Nonattendance at school; notice; investigation; discussion of irregular attendance, failing work, or behavior problems with parent.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

THE REVISED SCHOOL CODE


Act 451 of 1976


380.1586 Nonattendance at school; notice; investigation; discussion of irregular attendance, failing work, or behavior problems with parent.

Sec. 1586.

    (1) The attendance officer shall investigate each case of nonattendance at school when notified by a teacher, superintendent, intermediate superintendent, or other person of a violation of this part. If the child complained of is not exempt from public school attendance under the conditions listed in section 1561, the attendance officer shall proceed immediately in the manner provided in this part.

    (2) If a child is repeatedly absent from school without valid excuse, or is failing in schoolwork or gives evidence of behavior problems, and attempts to confer with the parent or other person in parental relationship to the child fail, the superintendent of schools, or the intermediate superintendent in a district which does not employ a superintendent, may request the attendance officer to notify the parent or other person in parental relationship by registered mail to come to the school or to a place designated at a time specified to discuss the child's irregularity in attendance, failing work, or behavior problems with the proper school authorities.

    (3) The superintendent, or the teacher in a district which does not employ a superintendent, shall provide information concerning the nonattendance of each nonresident pupil to the intermediate superintendent of the intermediate school district in which the nonresident pupil resides. The intermediate attendance officer, when notified by the intermediate superintendent or superintendent of schools, shall investigate and proceed in all cases of nonattendance of nonresident pupils in the same manner provided in this part for enforcing attendance of pupils attending schools in districts in which they reside.

History: 1976, Act 451, Imd. Eff. Jan. 13, 1977

PopularName Notes:

Act 451
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1989–1997 · leading case: Clonlara, Inc. v. Runkel
Clonlara, Inc. v. Runkel (1989) mied “§ 380.1586(1). Thus, the attendance officer has no discretion to initiate action.”
Hartfield v. East Grand Rapids Public Schools (1997) miwd “§§ 380.1586—380.1688. Plaintiffs also acknowledge that their attempts to home-school in 1993 did not qualify within Michigan’s private and parochial schools act, Mich.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 380.1586(1) — 1 case
Clonlara, Inc. v. Runkel (1989) mied “§ 380.1586(1). Thus, the attendance officer has no discretion to initiate action.”
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.