Preview:

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

JAMIE BUSH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v PENINSULAR REALTY, INC., Defendant-Appellee.

UNPUBLISHED December 13, 2011

No. 298617 Genesee Circuit Court LC No. 09-091246-NZ

Before: O'CONNELL, P.J., and MURRAY and DONOFRIO, JJ. PER CURIAM. Plaintiff appeals as of right an order granting defendant's motion for summary disposition in this retaliatory discharge action. Because plaintiff failed to establish that she engaged in a protected activity under the Worker's Disability Compensation Act (WDCA), MCL 418.101 et seq., failed to demonstrate a causal connection between her receipt of medical treatment and her discharge, and failed to show that defendant's legitimate, nonretaliatory reason for discharging her was merely pretextual, we affirm. We review de novo a trial court's decision on a motion for summary disposition. Latham v Barton Malow Co, 480 Mich 105, 111; 746 NW2d 868 (2008). Although defendant moved for summary disposition under both MCR 2.116(C)(8) and (C)(10), because the trial court relied on matters outside the pleadings when it granted the motion, we will review the court's decision under subrule (C)(10). Silberstein v Pro-Golf of America, Inc, 278 Mich App 446, 457; 750 NW2d 615 (2008). In reviewing a motion pursuant to MCR 2.116(C)(10), we review the affidavits, depositions, admissions and other documentary evidence in a light most favorable to the nonmoving party to determine whether there is a genuine issue of material fact for trial. Latham, 480 Mich at 111. We will consider only the evidence that was properly submitted to the trial court before its decision. Pe

Download JAMIE BUSH V PENINSULAR REALTY INC.pdf

Michigan Law