Legal Opinion

Durant v. Department of Education

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided October 10, 1983No. Docket 63901PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

On Remand

Before: Danhof, C.J., and M. F. Cavanagh and Mackenzie, JJ. M. F. Cavanagh, J.

Plaintiffs petitioned this Court for a writ of mandamus, seeking to compel the defendants to fund the Fitzgerald Public Schools in the same proportion as those schools were funded in the fiscal year 1978-1979, pursuant to the so-called Headlee Amendment, Const 1963, art 9, §§ 25-34. We denied mandamus on the basis that the plaintiffs had not exhausted their administrative remedies because they had not presented their claims to the local governmental claims review board under MCL 21.240; MSA 5.3194(610).…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Traverse City School Dist. v. Atty. Gen.Michigan Supreme Court · 1971
  2. Attorney General ex rel. Kies v. LowreyMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
  3. Reed v. Civil Service CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1942
  4. School District v. State Board of EducationMichigan Supreme Court · 1962
  5. Purser v. LedbetterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Durant v. State of MichiganMichigan Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Livingston County v. Department of Management & BudgetMichigan Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Durant v. Department of EducationMichigan Court of Appeals · 1990
  4. Durant v. STATE, DEPT. OF EDUC.Michigan Court of Appeals · 2000
  5. Adair v. State of MichiganMichigan Court of Appeals · 2002

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API