Short v. Michigan State Police — Court ordered dismissal of disability-discrimination claim because notice was filed too late

Case
Jeffrey M. Short v. Michigan State Police
Court
Michigan Court of Appeals
Judge
Sima G. Patel (Gretchen Whitmer, 2022)
Date Decided
August 3, 2026
Docket No.
375823
Topics
Disability Discrimination; Court of Claims Notice; Sovereign Immunity; Employment Law
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Jeffrey M. Short began working for the Michigan State Police in 2000 and was promoted to first lieutenant and post commander in 2022. Short alleged that he suffered from posttraumatic stress disorder stemming from an on-duty shooting and other experiences. During an investigation into a promotion scandal, Short disclosed in a second interview that he had delivered a sealed envelope to an officer who later received a promotion. The State Police suspended him and ultimately demoted him three ranks to trooper.

Short alleged that the suspension aggravated his PTSD, that he disclosed the condition to supervisors, and that the State Police improperly considered it when imposing the demotion. He filed a notice of intent in the Court of Claims on October 23, 2024, approximately nine months after his January 24, 2024 discipline appeal hearing, and later sued under the Michigan Persons with Disabilities Civil Rights Act. The circuit court denied the State Police’s motion for summary disposition, concluding that the general one-year notice period applied rather than the six-month period for claims involving personal injuries.

The Court’s Holding

The Michigan Court of Appeals held that a PWDCRA employment-discrimination claim is a claim for “personal injuries” under MCL 600.6431(4). The court reasoned that “personal injury” is a legal term of art broad enough to encompass an invasion of a personal right, including the statutory civil right to obtain employment without disability discrimination. It rejected the view that the provision is confined to claims involving bodily harm.

The court also concluded that prior decisions citing the general one-year notice provision had not decided which deadline governs discrimination claims because the plaintiffs in those cases had filed no notice at all. Declining to follow the unpublished decision in Chiravuri v. University of Michigan, the court ruled that the six-month deadline applied. Because Short filed his notice after that deadline, the court reversed and remanded for entry of summary disposition for the State Police under MCR 2.116(C)(7).

Key Takeaways

  • A disability-discrimination claim under the PWDCRA qualifies as a claim for “personal injuries” for purposes of the Court of Claims Act.
  • A claimant pursuing a PWDCRA employment-discrimination claim against Michigan or a state agency must comply with the six-month notice deadline in MCL 600.6431(4).
  • Earlier cases referring to the general one-year deadline did not resolve the issue when their plaintiffs had never filed the required notice.

Why It Matters

The decision imposes a shorter notice window on PWDCRA claimants suing Michigan agencies, even when their claims do not allege bodily injury. Attorneys handling disability-discrimination matters against the state must distinguish the six-month Court of Claims notice requirement from the longer limitations period for filing the underlying lawsuit.

The published ruling also expressly rejects the reasoning of an unpublished Court of Appeals decision that treated employment-discrimination claims as subject to the general one-year notice period.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top