919 N.W.2d 641
Mich. Ct. App.2018Background
- Meredith Summer, a Southfield Public Schools teacher, was rated “minimally effective” for 2011–2012, was laid off June 30, 2012, and taught summer school 2012. She alleges the evaluation was biased and she was denied observation results, an improvement plan, and an opportunity to improve.
- Summer sued under MCL 380.1248 (which incorporates MCL 380.1249 evaluation requirements), alleging the layoff violated statutory limits on permissible factors for personnel decisions. Defendants moved for summary disposition.
- This Court previously (Summer I) held §1248 provides a private cause of action when a layoff is based on nonstatutory considerations or on an evaluation that did not comply with §1249, and remanded for the trial court to assess whether Summer’s complaint stated such a claim.
- After Summer I, the Legislature amended MCL 380.1249 by 2015 PA 173, adding §1249(7) that "this section does not affect the operation or applicability of section 1248," and defendants argued the amendment nullified Summer I.
- The trial court granted summary disposition, concluding the amendment overruled Summer I and, alternatively, that Summer’s amended complaint failed to state a §1248/§1249-based claim and defendants had complied with evaluation statutes. This appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 2015 PA 173 overturned this Court's holding in Summer I | Summer: the §1249(7) amendment does not alter Summer I and does not eliminate a §1248 claim based on §1249 noncompliance | Defendants: the amendment shows the statutes are distinct and precludes §1249-based claims via §1248 | Court: §1249(7) does not overrule Summer I; amendment merely states §1249 does not affect §1248 and does not bar §1248 actions alleging §1249 noncompliance |
| Whether Summer’s amended complaint states a claim under MCL 380.1248(3) (MCR 2.116(C)(8)) | Summer: alleged layoff resulted from a minimally effective rating produced by bias and procedural failures (no observation results, no improvement plan, no opportunity to improve), fitting Summer I’s framework | Defendants: allegations are subjective and fail to plead specific §1249 violations; layoffs need not follow improvements/opportunity-to-cure | Court: complaint sufficiently alleges §1249 defects and nonstatutory considerations (bias) that could make the layoff unlawful; claim survives (C)(8) |
| Whether defendants complied with statutory evaluation requirements (MCR 2.116(C)(10)) | Summer: factual record incomplete; discovery not finished; evidence supports that evaluator had motive and that feedback/opportunity-to-improve were lacking | Defendants: submitted affidavits and documents showing evaluation and subsequent processes that discharged statutory obligations | Court: disputed factual issues remain (bias, timeliness/adequacy of feedback, opportunity to improve); summary disposition premature (C)(10) |
| Whether retroactive application of 2015 PA 173 would bar vested claims | Summer: claims vested before amendment, so retroactive abrogation is prohibited | Defendants: argued effect of amendment supports dismissal | Court: even if amendment were read to nullify Summer I, retroactive abolition of vested causes would be barred; claims vested pre-amendment |
Key Cases Cited
- Summer v. Southfield Bd. of Ed., 310 Mich. App. 660 (appellate decision establishing §1248 §1249 relationship and private-action framework)
- Baumgartner v. Perry Pub. Sch., 309 Mich. App. 507 (jurisdiction and statutory interpretation in school code layoffs)
- Maiden v. Rozwood, 461 Mich. 109 (standard for reviewing motions under MCR 2.116(C)(8) and (C)(10))
- In re Complaint of Rovas Against SBC Mich, 482 Mich. 90 (statutory interpretation principles)
- Sun Valley Foods Co. v. Ward, 460 Mich. 230 (statutory language controls when unambiguous)
- GMAC LLC v. Dep’t of Treasury, 286 Mich. App. 365 (legislative intent controls despite other construction rules)
- Caron v. Cranbrook Educ. Community, 298 Mich. App. 629 (summary disposition may be premature while discovery incomplete)
- White v. Taylor Distrib. Co., Inc., 275 Mich. App. 615 (summary disposition standards on factual disputes)
- Lewis v. LeGrow, 258 Mich. App. 175 (summary disposition and factual disputes)