Harrison v. Olde Financial Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that, when the plaintiff presents direct evidence of discrimination, federal law provides appropriate guidance for analyzing claims brought under the Michigan Civil Rights Act
• holding that “racial slurs by a decisionmaker constitute direct evidence of racial discrimination that is sufficient to get the plaintiff’s case to the jury”
• holding that the trial court abused its discre tion when it precluded the plaintiff from discovering reports on the ground that the reports were irrelevant without first inspecting the reports in camera to determine if they were subject to discovery
• explaining that, “when direct evidence of discrimination is involved, we believe that federal case law provides appropriate guidance for analyzing discrimination claims arising under the Michigan Civil Rights Act.”
• holding the plaintiff “established a question of material fact regarding whether” a “decision was influenced by a person” when there was testimony the decisionmaker “consulted with and considered” that person’s views
• noting that the ELCRA “was patterned on Title VII”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).