Preview:

STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS


MERRIANNE WEBERG, DOUGLAS WILFRED WEBERG, DOUGLAS EDWARD WEBERG, DARRELL JAMES WEBERG, and BRANDON GEORGE WEBERG, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v STATE OF MICHIGAN and MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendants-Appellees.

UNPUBLISHED January 12, 2001

No. 217671 Ingham Circuit Court LC No. 96-085041-NO

Before: Saad, P.J., and Hoekstra and Markey, JJ. PER CURIAM. In this race discrimination case, plaintiffs appeal by right from the trial court's orders granting defendants' motions for summary disposition and denying plaintiffs' motions for reconsideration. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand. This case arises out of defendant Michigan Department of Corrections' ("MDOC") employment and subsequent suspension of plaintiff Merrianne Weberg (hereinafter "plaintiff Weberg"), a white female corrections sergeant, from the Western Wayne Correctional Facility, where plaintiff Weberg alleged that she was subjected to numerous incidents of racial discrimination. In the present action, plaintiffs alleged nine counts against defendants in their amended complaint. The trial court subsequently dismissed all nine counts after it granted defendants' motions for summary disposition. On appeal, plaintiffs assert that the trial court erred in dismissing five of the nine counts: (1) Count III (disparate treatment race discrimination in violation of the Elliott Larsen Civil Rights Act ("ELCRA"), (2) Count IV (disparate impact race discrimination in violation of ELCRA), (3) Count V (intentional race discrimination in violation of ELCRA), (4) Count VI (hostile work environment based on race in violation of ELCRA), and (5) Count IX (loss of consortium as a derivative claim). Plaintiffs do not take issue with the trial court's grant of summary disposition to defendants on Counts I, II, VII, and VIII.

-1-

With respect to plaintiffs' disparate treatment, disparate impact, and hostile work environment claims, the trial court granted summary disposition to defendants pursuant to MCR 2.116(C)(10) (no genuine issue of material fact) and dismissed the claims. Initially, the trial court denied defendants' motion for summary disposition with respect to plaintiffs' intentional discrimination and loss of consortium claims, but later granted summary disposition to defendants after concluding that plaintiffs were collaterally estopped from pursuing these two claims because of the dismissal of a federal court action1 that plaintiffs had filed.2 Plaintiffs' factual allegations in this state action are identical to those pleaded in plaintiffs' federal action. However, the federal court action also alleged a federal racial discrimination claim premised on 42 USC

Download MERRIANNE WEBERG V DEPT OF CORRECTIONS.pdf

Michigan Law