Munro v. Elk Rapids Schools
Dissent
Black, J.
(dissenting). I adhere to the majority opinion and decision ( 383 Mich 661 ). Nothing set forth in Goldberg v. Kelly (1970), 397 US 254 ( 90 S Ct 1011 , 25 L Ed 2d 287 ), upon alleged strength of which the instant rehearing was ordered, is offended by our said decision. Indeed, Goldberg is not presently assigned as applicable to or for reversal of that decision.
My vote on rehearing is cast for affirmance of the judgment of the Court of Appeals (17 Mich App (368).
On Rehearing
On Rehearing Per Curiam.
We granted rehearing in this case to reconsider the question which divided our Court 1 and to weigh the effect of Goldberg v. Kelly (1970), 397 US 254 ( 90 S Ct 1011 , 25 L Ed 287 ) decided subsequent to our prior decision herein on the question of due process.
We are satisfied that the Michigan statute 2 properly interpreted fully satisfies the constitutional requirements of due process.
For the reasons set forth in the minority opinion heretofore filed herein and reported at 383 Mich 661 , beginning at 688, which is hereby adopted as the opinion of this Court, we hold that under the statute, unless a probationary teacher is notified in writing that his work is unsatisfactory, upon completion of his probationary period he is entitled to employ *620 ment with tenure status with all of its specified rights and privileges.
Let mandamus issue as prayed.
T. M. Kavanagh, C. J., and Adams, T. E. Brennan, T. G. Kavanagh, Swainson, and Williams, JJ., concurred.
(1970), 383 Mich 661 .
MCLA § 38.71 et seq. (Stat Ann 1968 Rev § 15.1971 et seq.).
Combined text as published — syllabus, headnotes and all opinions in one document
385 Mich. 618 (1971) 189 N.W.2d 224
MUNRO
v.
ELK RAPIDS SCHOOLS No. 24 January Term 1970, Docket No. 52,508. No. 18 June Term 1971, Docket No. 52,508.
Supreme Court of Michigan.
Decided July 17, 1970. Decided August 27, 1971. Rehearing denied September 28, 1971.
*619 Foster, Lindemer, Swift & Collins (by James A. White and Lynwood E. Beekman ), for plaintiff.
Zerafa & Zerafa (by Robert J. Kievit ), for defendants.
Amici Curiae: American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan (by Erwin B. Ellmann ).
American Civil Liberties Union (by Melvin L. Wulf, Legal Director).
ON REHEARING
PER CURIAM:
We granted rehearing in this case to reconsider the question which divided our Court [1] and to weigh the effect of Goldberg v. Kelly (1970), 397 US 254 ( 90 S Ct 1011 , 25 L Ed 287 ) decided subsequent to our prior decision herein on the question of due process.
We are satisfied that the Michigan statute [2] properly interpreted fully satisfies the constitutional requirements of due process.
For the reasons set forth in the minority opinion heretofore filed herein and reported at 383 Mich 661 , beginning at 688, which is hereby adopted as the opinion of this Court, we hold that under the statute, unless a probationary teacher is notified in writing that his work is unsatisfactory, upon completion of his probationary period he is entitled to employment *620 with tenure status with all of its specified rights and privileges.
Let mandamus issue as prayed.
T.M. KAVANAGH, C.J., and ADAMS, T.E. BRENNAN, T.G. KAVANAGH, SWAINSON, and WILLIAMS, JJ., concurred.
BLACK, J. ( dissenting ).
I adhere to the majority opinion and decision ( 383 Mich 661 ). Nothing set forth in Goldberg v. Kelly (1970), 397 US 254 ( 90 S Ct 1011 , 25 L Ed 2d 287 ), upon alleged strength of which the instant rehearing was ordered, is offended by our said decision. Indeed, Goldberg is not presently assigned as applicable to or for reversal of that decision.
My vote on rehearing is cast for affirmance of the judgment of the Court of Appeals (17 Mich App (368).
NOTES
[1] (1970), 383 Mich 661 .
[2] MCLA § 38.71 et seq. (Stat Ann 1968 Rev § 15.1971 et seq. ).
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 26 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.