 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas v. Hilts2/15/2002
UNPUBLISHED
Plaintiff Robin Thomas appeals as of right from a circuit court order granting summary disposition in favor of defendants Robert Hilts and Lake County pursuant to MCR 2.116(C)(10) on plaintiff's claim of sex discrimination. We affirm.
In April 1990, plaintiff began employment with defendant Lake County when she was hired as a part-time corrections officer by then Sheriff Peter Loucks and assigned to the county jail in Baldwin. She was subsequently transferred to the Technical Rules Violators (TRV) where she continued to work as a corrections officer. In March 1992, plaintiff became a full-time employee and in August 1995, she was promoted to the position of sergeant at TRV by the undersheriff and defendant, Sheriff Robert Hilts. She remained a sergeant and continued working in corrections as a supervisor until her employment was terminated in November 1996.
While plaintiff was on vacation in October 1996, an incident regarding her treatment of another employee came to the attention of the TRV administrator. During the course of the investigation of this incident, several other corrections officers came forward with complaints regarding plaintiff. The undersheriff reviewed the complaints and reduced the charges against plaintiff to writing. On her return from vacation, plaintiff met with the undersheriff and defendant Hilts and was placed on an unpaid suspension. Plaintiff responded to the charges, was provided a hearing, and had several meetings with the undersheriff. At the conclusion of the investigation, the undersheriff recommended that defendant Hilts terminate plaintiff's employment, which he did by letter dated November 27, 1996. The stated reasons for plaintiff's termination were sexual harassment of her male subordinates, abuse of command position, and violation of policy for the manner in which she criticized employees.
Plaintiff subsequently filed the present complaint in Lake Circuit Court, alleging sex discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 USC 2000e et seq., and Michigan's Civil Rights Act (CRA), MCL 37.2101 et seq. Although the analysis to be used in evaluating state and federal claims of sex discrimination is essentially the same, see Cunningham v Dearborn Bd of Ed, 246 Mich App 621, 626 n 1; 633 NW2d 481 (2001), on appeal plaintiff has made no argument in regard to her federal Title VII claim. Accordingly, we conclude that any issues related to her federal sex discrimination claim have been abandoned on appeal. MCR 7.212(C)(7); Wilson v Taylor, 457 Mich 232, 243; 577 NW2d 100 (1998); FMB-First Michigan Bank v Bailey, 232 Mich App 711, 717; 591 NW2d 676 (1998); Weiss v Hodge (After Remand), 223 Mich App 620, 634; 567 NW2d 468 (1997).
In her complaint, plaintiff claimed disparate treatment regarding her discipline and termination, alleging that similarly situated male employees accused of similar conduct had been suspended with pay and that defendants previously allowed a male supervisory employee accused of sexual harassment to retire rather than be terminated. Plaintiff also contended that male employees charged with sexual harassment were not terminated and were allowed to have outside agencies investigate harassment charges against them. Following discovery, plaintiff also alleged that there existed direct proof of discriminatory animus toward women on the part of the sheriff, defendant Hilts.
Defendants moved for summary disposition pursuant to MCR 2.116(C)(10) and the circuit court initially denied the motion pending the close of discovery. Ultimately, however, the court granted defendants' motion, ruling that plaintiff failed to demonstrate the existence o
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Michigan Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|