Demings v. City of Ecorse
Michigan Supreme Court
1DissentRiley, J.
I
We dissent from the majority holding that the circuit court has concurrent jurisdiction with the merc of public employees’ fair representation claims. The Court reaches that conclusion by noting that the pera was patterned on the nlra, under which courts have concurrent jurisdiction with the nlrb of fair representation cases. Having found no "adequate reason for departing from the federal model,” the majority finds that concurrent jurisdiction is similarly appropriate in Michigan public sector cases._
*72Public employee labor relations in Michigan are governed by the pera. MCL 423.201 et seq.;…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Vaca v. SipesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Steele v. Louisville & Nashville RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Ford Motor Co. v. HuffmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
- Smith v. Evening News Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.