Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
12 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 2016–2025 10 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Michigan courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Hecht v. National Heritage Academies, Incgreen2 sentences2022(The answer to all three questions is “no.”) [Sunstein, Textualism and the Duck-Rabbit Illusion, 11 Cal L Rev Online 463, 475 (2020).] 10 Despite the fact that this Court has stated that the “ultimate question” in discrimination cases is whether “intentional discrimination” has occurred, Hecht, 499 Mich at 606 (emphasis added), the majority now declines to decide whether intent has anything to do with an ELCRA claim. 2022(The answer to all three questions is “no.”) [Sunstein, Textualism and the Duck-Rabbit Illusion, 11 Cal L Rev Online 463, 475 (2020).] 10 Despite the fact that this Court has stated that the “ultimate question” in discrimination cases is whether “intentional discrimination” has occurred, Hecht, 499 Mich at 606 (emphasis added), the majority now declines to decide whether intent has anything to do with an ELCRA claim. | 3 | 3 |
Garg v. MacOmb County Community Mental Health Servicesgreen2 sentences2025See Garg v Macomb Co Community Mental Health Servs, 472 Mich 263, 284 ; 696 NW2d 646 (2005) (holding that an ELCRA claim must be filed within three years of the date of the accrual of the cause of action pursuant to MCL 600.5805). 4 required plaintiff to file suit within six months after the date of the employment action giving rise to suit” and that plaintiff failed to provide any authority that the Acknowledgment was unconscionable. 2025See Garg v Macomb Co Community Mental Health Servs, 472 Mich 263, 284 ; 696 NW2d 646 (2005) (holding that an ELCRA claim must be filed within three years of the date of the accrual of the cause of action pursuant to MCL 600.5805). 4 required plaintiff to file suit within six months after the date of the employment action giving rise to suit” and that plaintiff failed to provide any authority that the Acknowledgment was unconscionable. | 1 | 2 |
Rymal v. Baergengreen2 sentences2024See Rymal v Baergen, 262 Mich App 274, 315 ; 686 NW2d 241 (2004) (“MCL 37.2701(a) prohibits retaliation where a party lodges a charge or a complaint about a violation of the CRA.”).8 Plaintiff admitted his complaint to the IOC did not allege that his race was the motivating factor for any of defendant’s conduct. 2024See Rymal v Baergen, 262 Mich App 274, 315 ; 686 NW2d 241 (2004) (“MCL 37.2701(a) prohibits retaliation where a party lodges a charge or a complaint about a violation of the CRA.”).8 Plaintiff admitted his complaint to the IOC did not allege that his race was the motivating factor for any of defendant’s conduct. | 1 | 1 |
Rymal v. Baergengreen2 sentences2024See Rymal v Baergen, 262 Mich App 274, 315 ; 686 NW2d 241 (2004) (“MCL 37.2701(a) prohibits retaliation where a party lodges a charge or a complaint about a violation of the CRA.”).8 Plaintiff admitted his complaint to the IOC did not allege that his race was the motivating factor for any of defendant’s conduct. 2024See Rymal v Baergen, 262 Mich App 274, 315 ; 686 NW2d 241 (2004) (“MCL 37.2701(a) prohibits retaliation where a party lodges a charge or a complaint about a violation of the CRA.”).8 Plaintiff admitted his complaint to the IOC did not allege that his race was the motivating factor for any of defendant’s conduct. | 1 | 1 |
Chambers v. Trettco, Incgreen1 sentence2024See Chambers, 463 Mich at 320 n 7. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
FILLMORE TP. v. Secretary of State
green
2 sentences2024Garg v Macomb Co Community Mental Health Servs, 472 Mich 263, 284 ; 696 NW2d 646 (2005), amended 473 Mich 1205 (2005). 2024Garg v Macomb Co Community Mental Health Servs, 472 Mich 263, 284 ; 696 NW2d 646 (2005), amended 473 Mich 1205 (2005). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Gjokaj v. United States Steel Corp.
green
1 sentence2023We disagree. 3 We note that defendant also requested summary disposition premised on Gjokaj v US Steel Corp, 700 Fed Appx 494 (CA 6, 2017), contending that plaintiff failed to properly follow defendant’s policy and procedure relating to treatment with defendant’s medical providers, and thereby failing to invoke a right under the WDCA. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
John Does 11-18 v. Department of Corrections
green
2 sentences2023Lastly, in Does 11-18 v Dep’t of Corrections, 323 Mich App 479, 490 ; 917 NW2d 730 (2018), this Court addressed the defendants’ argument that inmates’ civil rights claims brought -7- under the ELCRA were barred by immunity under the GTLA. 2023Lastly, in Does 11-18 v Dep’t of Corrections, 323 Mich App 479, 490 ; 917 NW2d 730 (2018), this Court addressed the defendants’ argument that inmates’ civil rights claims brought -7- under the ELCRA were barred by immunity under the GTLA. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Hamed v. Wayne County
green
1 sentence2023Defendants insist that they are immune under the GTLA because Doe’s “ELCRA claim is an artful attempt to avoid governmental immunity by seeking to hold a school district and its employees vicariously liable for the criminal actions of a teacher.” In support, defendants rely solely on a footnote in Hamed v Wayne Co, 490 Mich 1 ; 805 NW2d 237 (2011), which defendants incorrectly characterize as a “holding” in that case. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Manning v. City of Hazel Park
green
2 sentences2023Manning v City of Hazel Park, 202 Mich App 685, 699 ; 509 NW2d 874 (1993). 2023Manning v City of Hazel Park, 202 Mich App 685, 699 ; 509 NW2d 874 (1993). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green
green
2 sentences2019When analyzing claims under the ELCRA where no direct evidence of bias can be found, Michigan courts employ the framework for analyzing discrimination claims articulated by the United States Supreme Court in McDonnell Douglas Corp v Green, 411 US 792, 802-803 ; 93 S Ct 1817 ; 36 L Ed2d 668 (1973). 2019When analyzing claims under the ELCRA where no direct evidence of bias can be found, Michigan courts employ the framework for analyzing discrimination claims articulated by the United States Supreme Court in McDonnell Douglas Corp v Green, 411 US 792, 802-803 ; 93 S Ct 1817 ; 36 L Ed2d 668 (1973). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Sniecinski v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Michigan
green
2 sentences2016To establish an ELCRA claim using indirect or circumstantial evidence of discriminatory animus, a plaintiff must establish a prima facie case by “present[ing] evidence that (1) she belongs to a protected class, (2) she suffered an adverse employment action, (3) she was qualified for the position, and (4) her failure to obtain the position occurred under circumstances giving rise to an inference of unlawful discrimination.” Sniecinski v Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Mich, 469 Mich 124, 134 ; 666 NW2d 186 (2003). 2016To establish an ELCRA claim using indirect or circumstantial evidence of discriminatory animus, a plaintiff must establish a prima facie case by “present[ing] evidence that (1) she belongs to a protected class, (2) she suffered an adverse employment action, (3) she was qualified for the position, and (4) her failure to obtain the position occurred under circumstances giving rise to an inference of unlawful discrimination.” Sniecinski v Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Mich, 469 Mich 124, 134 ; 666 NW2d 186 (2003). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.