Employment - Associational or ‘third party’ retaliation claims

Where the Court of Appeals ruled that the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act did not authorize a so-called third-party retaliation claim, the ELCRA prohibits such retaliation under MCL 37.2701(a), so that ruling must be reversed.

“In this case we address whether a so-called third-party retaliation claim, i.e., where one person claims that they were subjected to retaliation as an indirect attack against someone else who engaged in protected activity, is actionable under the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act (ELCRA), MCL 37.2101 et seq ., and, if so, precisely where the basis for that right is found in the act. We conclude that the ELCRA prohibits such retaliation under MCL 37.2701(a). MCL 37.2701(a) makes no distinction between direct and third-party retaliation claims, so a plaintiff may state a claim of either direct or third-party retaliation under that provision and any other provision of MCL 37.2701 that applies to the facts of their case. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand to the Genesee Circuit Court for further proceedings.

“In sum, the Court of Appeals wrongly concluded that Subsection (f) exclusively addresses third-party or associational retaliation claims and, based on this misunderstanding, applied inapplicable canons of statutory interpretation to unduly limit what is otherwise clear regarding the operation of Subsection (a) when read in conjunction with MCL 37.2801. Properly understood, Subsection (a) permits the type of third-party claim implicated in this case, so the trial court correctly denied defendant’s motion for summary disposition under MCR 2.116(C)(8).

“MCL 37.2701(a) provides a cause of action for associational or ‘third party’ retaliation claims, and plaintiffs’ first amended complaint sufficiently pleaded such a claim. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand to the Genesee Circuit Court for further proceedings.”

Miller v. Dep't of Corr.; MiLW 06-108010 , 21 pages; Michigan Supreme Court; Cavanagh, J., joined by Clement, J., Zahra, J., Viviano, J., Bernstein, J., Welch, J., Bolden, J.; on appeal from the Court of Appeals; Kendell S. Asbenson for appellant; Jonathan Marko for appellee.

Click here to read the full text of the opinion

Copyright © 2024 BridgeTower Media. All Rights Reserved.