Preview:

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

JAMES MENGHINI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v EDWARDS AUTOMOTIVE, INC., Defendant-Appellee.

UNPUBLISHED October 26, 2010

No. 293927 Dickinson Circuit Court LC No. 08-015499-NI

Before: WHITBECK, P.J., and SAWYER and BORRELLO, JJ. PER CURIAM. Plaintiff appeals as of right from the trial court's August 17, 2009 order granting defendant's motion for summary disposition under MCR 2.116(C)(10) in this worker's compensation retaliatory discharge case. For the reasons set forth in this opinion, we affirm the trial court's grant of summary disposition. I. FACTS The record in this case reveals that plaintiff began working for defendant automotive dealership on March 12, 2000, in its parts department. Prior to his employment with defendant, plaintiff had worked for another dealership where he had injured his back. While there is testimony in the record that plaintiff made defendant aware of his prior injury at the time that he was hired, Jeff Edwards, one of the owners of the dealership and in charge of personnel matters, did not recall being made aware of plaintiff's history of back problems. Testimony of both parties revealed that plaintiff's employment record with defendant did not contain any documentation of work infractions for a number of years. Then, in 2007, while lifting tires onto a tire rack, plaintiff reinjured his back. Plaintiff described the injury as minor, and following a short period of physical therapy, plaintiff returned to work in the parts department. However, defendant issued a written discipline documentation form to plaintiff for not wearing the back brace provided by defendant. Jeff Edwards admitted that the dealership did not have a specific written policy at the time the discipline form was given to plaintiff requiring plaintiff to have worn a back brace. On February 28, 2008, plaintiff was hauling parts from the parts department to the body shop when he developed pain in his leg. He again underwent physical therapy and received another written discipline documentation form for not wearing a back brace while lifting parts. -1-

After plaintiff returned to work from his second injury, Jeff Edwards testified that he transferred plaintiff to the service department because of his back injuries. Despite not requesting the transfer, plaintiff testified that he was initially "happy for that move." A month later, in March 2008, plaintiff asked Jeff Edwards for an increase in pay to make up for the difference between what he was making in the service department and what he made in the parts department because of the lack of overtime. At his deposition, plaintiff testified that Jeff Edwards told him, "You're lucky to have a job

Download JAMES MENGHINI V EDWARDS AUTOMOTIVE INC.pdf

Michigan Law