Shelby Baumgartner v. Perry Public Schools
309 Mich. App. 507
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- In 2011 the Michigan Legislature enacted four tied public acts (2011 PAs 100–103) that removed teacher layoffs from collective bargaining, required merit‑based layoff procedures, and made judicial review the exclusive remedy for layoff challenges.
- New School Code sections MCL 380.1248 and MCL 380.1249 require locally adopted performance evaluation systems and mandate layoff ordering by teacher effectiveness; seniority is only a tiebreaker.
- The Teacher Tenure Act (TTA) historically gave the State Tenure Commission (STC) jurisdiction over discharges and demotions, but did not expressly cover layoffs; a 1975 Court of Appeals decision (Freiberg) had allowed limited STC review of layoffs under a "subterfuge" theory.
- After the 2011 amendments repealed or revised TTA provisions that supported Freiberg and created exclusive judicial remedies for layoff claims, several laid‑off teachers appealed to the STC; ALJs dismissed the claims for lack of STC jurisdiction, but the STC majority asserted jurisdiction and remanded.
- School districts appealed the STC interlocutory remands to the Court of Appeals asking (1) whether the Court could review interlocutory STC orders and (2) whether the STC had jurisdiction over layoff claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Court may review interlocutory STC orders | Petitioners: Court lacks jurisdiction to review interlocutory STC rulings | Respondents: MCL 24.301 exception permits immediate review when issue is purely jurisdictional and final agency order would be inadequate | Court of Appeals has jurisdiction to hear interlocutory appeals because the dispute is purely jurisdictional and judicial review later would be inadequate |
| Whether STC has jurisdiction over layoff claims generally | Petitioners: STC retains jurisdiction (Freiberg/subterfuge) to hear layoffs alleged to be pretextual discharges | Respondents: 2011 Amendments moved layoff regulation into School Code, repealed TTA provisions, and made courts sole forum | STC lacks jurisdiction over layoffs; 2011 amendments removed any statutory basis (including Freiberg) for STC review |
| Whether "subterfuge" doctrine saves STC jurisdiction | Petitioners: Freiberg permits STC to look behind economic rationale to protect tenure rights | Respondents: Freiberg relied on TTA provisions now repealed/modified; layoffs now governed by MCL 380.1248/.1249 with sole remedy in court | Freiberg is no longer binding or applicable after the 2011 amendments; subterfuge doctrine cannot confer STC jurisdiction |
| Proper forum and remedy for challenged layoffs | Petitioners: administrative review by STC (or at least ALJ) | Respondents: exclusive judicial remedy under MCL 380.1248 (reinstatement only; no economic damages) | Challenges to layoffs under §§1248–1249 must be brought in court; remedy limited to reinstatement as provided by statute |
Key Cases Cited
- Freiberg v. Bd. of Educ. of Big Bay De Noc Sch. Dist., 61 Mich. App. 404 (1975) (created limited STC "subterfuge" review of layoffs)
- Ranta v. Eaton Rapids Pub. Sch. Bd. of Educ., 271 Mich. App. 261 (2006) (STC jurisdiction limited to questions arising under the TTA)
- Tomiak v. Hamtramck Sch. Dist., 426 Mich. (1986) (distinguishing layoffs from discharges/demotions under TTA)
- In re Complaint of Rovas Against SBC Michigan, 482 Mich. 90 (2008) (agency interpretations entitled to respect but cannot conflict with plain statutory meaning)
- Detroit Trust Co. v. Allinger, 271 Mich. 600 (1935) (repeal of a statute divests inchoate rights arising under it)