Kenneth McKenzie and Fatima Olden, correctional officers at Michigan’s Macomb Correctional Facility, filed lawsuits under Michigan’s Persons With Disabilities Civil Rights Act, the Americans With Disabilities Act, and the Rehabilitation Act. The officers alleged that the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) failed to accommodate their dog allergies after the facility launched a program in 2015 where inmates trained service dogs. Both officers worked in housing units where the dogs were kept and reported allergic reactions, including respiratory issues and skin irritation. They submitted formal accommodation requests to be reassigned to dog-free units, which MDOC denied after temporary transfers. After filing EEOC complaints (which found probable cause for ADA violations but were dropped by the DOJ), they brought suit in 2018.
The Court of Appeals of Michigan reversed the trial court’s denial of summary judgment for the State, holding that the claims were barred by governmental immunity due to untimely notice under MCL 600.6431. The statute requires plaintiffs suing the State to file a “written notice of intention to file a claim” within one year of the claim’s accrual — a rule the Michigan Supreme Court clarified in Christie v. Wayne State University.
The officers’ untimely notice was fatal: they filed their Court of Claims notice years after their claims accrued, and their later attempt to “cure” the defect post-Christie failed because the statute’s one-year deadline is strict. The Court also dismissed the officers’ waiver argument — that the State forfeited immunity by litigating for years — because Michigan law presumes governmental immunity unless proper notice is given, and the issue was never raised below. MDOC and its warden (sued in his official capacity) were entitled to immunity, mooting the merits of the disability claims.
McKenzie v Dep’t of Corrections, 2025 WL 2315352 (Mich. Ct. App. Aug. 11, 2025).