Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act (ELCRA) claims; Court of Claims Act (COCA); Notice requirement; MCL 600.6431(1); Claims against the state; MCL 600.6419(7); Retroactivity; Christie v Wayne State Univ; Flamont v Department of Corrs; Community colleges; Doan v Kellogg Cmty Coll; Governmental immunity; Governmental Tort Liability Act; MCL 691.1407; Political subdivision; MCL 691.1401(e); Pohutski v Allen Park

The court held that plaintiffs’ ELCRA claims against defendant-community college district were not barred by the COCA notice requirement because defendant is not the state or a state arm or agency. Plaintiffs sued defendant and its security director, alleging sex-based disparate treatment, hostile work environment, and retaliation. Defendant moved for summary disposition, arguing in part that plaintiffs failed to timely file a written claim or notice of intent in the Court of Claims under MCL 600.6431(1). The trial court denied the motion. On appeal, the court agreed with defendant that Christie applies retroactively, noting Flamont held that Christie “corrected a misinterpretation of MCL 600.6431.” But the court held that the notice requirement still did not apply because defendant did not fall within the statutory definition of “the state or any of its departments or officers.” Relying on Doan, the court reasoned community colleges are “local in nature” because they are locally created, locally governed, locally financed, and primarily serve the community. It rejected defendant’s reliance on governmental immunity because a community college district may be a governmental agency for tort-immunity purposes, but only as a “political subdivision,” and “‘governmental agency and state are not synonymous.’” Thus, plaintiffs were not required to comply with the COCA notice provision. Affirmed.