Larkin v Bay City Public Schools – 5.01

Larkin v Bay City Public Schools
Digest no. 5.01

Section 27(i)

Cite as: Larkin v Bay City Pub Schools, 89 Mich App 199 (1979); lv den, 406 Mich 979 (1979).

Appeal pending: No
Claimant: Mary A. Larkin
Employer: Bay City Public Schools
Docket no.: B75 10784 50688
Date of decision: March 20, 1979

View/download the full decision

COURT OF APPEALS HOLDING: (1) The denial period for school employees is constitutional. (2) Advance notice of termination is not early severance for a school employee. (3) An academic year is not affected by a claimant’s particular circumstances.

FACTS: The claimant, a hall monitor, did not work during the summer vacation periods. “By letter dated March 25, 1975, plaintiff was informed by the Bay City School District that it did not plan to rehire her for the 1975-1976 school year, and that her employment was terminated as of June 7, 1975.” The claimant was denied benefits for the summer. She was recalled in September, 1975.

DECISION: The claimant is subject to the school denial period under Section 27(i) of the Act.

RATIONALE: “First, the most reasonable interpretation of Section 27(i)(3) requires that mere giving of notice of a future termination date does not serve to presently abrogate the employment relationship.”

“Plaintiff contends that because she would not be reemployed in September, 1975, there is no succeeding academic year.”

“The existence of an academic year, as envisioned by the legislature, is to be determined by the objective criteria of the calendar established by the district, and not by the individual’s particular circumstances.”

“Finally, the record shows that plaintiff did, in fact, resume her work in September of 1975, thus mooting her claim.”

“[W]e conclude that the instant legislation is to be examined by the traditional rational basis standard under which it comes before us clothed with a presumption of constitutional validity.”

Digest Author: Board of Review (original digest here)
Digest Updated:
11/90