Case ID: mich_377/html/0015-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "O’Hara, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ROSS v. TAYLOR TOWNSHIP SCHOOL BOARD. SIMMONS v. SAME.
    1. Administrative Law—Pair Employment Practices Commission —Courts—Record.
    The review by the circuit court of action taken by the fair employment practices commission is limited to an appeal in the nature of eertiorari on the record developed before the administrative agency.
    2. Appeal and Error—Questions Reviewable—Review of Order of Administrative Agency.
    Whether provisions of Constitution and subsequently adopted statutes nullified the rule of law as declared in a ease on appeal from the circuit court made when it was reviewing the action of an administrative agency is not passed on by Supreme Court, where such issue is not properly before it (Const 1963, art 5, § 29; PA 1963 [2d Ex Sess], No 45).
    References for Points in Headnotes
    [1, 2] 2 Am Jur 2d, Administrative Law § 697 et seq.
    
    [3] 2 Am Jur 2d, Administrative Law § 730 et seq.
    
    [4] 5 Am Jur 2d, Appeal and Error § 1009 et seq.
    
    
      3. Same—Review of Order of Administrative Agency.
    Appeal from a circuit court’s order, made on review of an order of an administrative agency, is controlled by the constitutional and statutory law as it existed at the time the appeal was taken.
    4. Costs—Appeal—Circuit Court Review of Action of Pair Employment Practices Commission.
    No costs are allowed on appeal from circuit court’s order denying a motion for rehearing and a motion to dismiss elaim of appeal and demand for a jury trial in an appeal from a final determination of the fair employment practices commission.
    Appeal from Wayne; Weideman (Carl M.), J.
    Submitted October 6, 1965.
    (Calendar Nos. 6, 7; Docket Nos. 50,494, 50,495.)
    Decided December 7, 1965.
    Mary Ruth Ross presented a claim of discrimination on the part of the School Board of the Township of Taylor to the Michigan Pair Employment Practices Commission. Similar claim presented by Jessie Simmons. Claims upheld by commission. Appeal by school board taken to circuit court. Motion to dismiss appeal denied. Plaintiffs appeal.
    Order vacated and remanded with instructions.
    
      Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengo ski, Solicitor General, Gerald David White and Carl Levin, Assistant Attorneys General, for plaintiffs.
    
      Harry F. Vellmure, for defendant school board.
   O’Hara, J.

This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court of Wayne county denying a motion for rehearing and a motion to dismiss a claim of appeal and demand for a jury trial in an appeal from a final determination of the fair employment practices commission. The circuit court’s order was entered February 13,1962.

The issue here presented is indistinguishable from that passed upon by this Court in Lesniak v. Fair Employment Practices Commission, 364 Mich 495. It is controlled by the law of that case.

Appellees urge in this brief that the Constitution of 1963, art 5, § 29, and the passage of PA 1963 (2d Ex Sess), No 45 (CL 1948, §37.4 [Stat Ann 1965 Cum Supp § 3.548(4)]), nullifies the rule in Lesniak.

We do not pass upon the issue because it is not properly before us. The case at bar is controlled by the constitutional and statutory law as it existed at the time the appeal was taken.

The order of the circuit court is vacated. The case is remanded for disposition not inconsistent with the holding in Lesniak, supra. No costs.

T. M. Kavanagh, C. J., and Dethmers, Kelly, Black, Souris, and Smith, J J., concurred.

Adams, J., did not sit.