Powe v. MICHIGAN DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS
This text of 627 N.W.2d 260 (Powe v. MICHIGAN DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Charlene POWE, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendant-Appellee.
Supreme Court of Michigan.
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal from the October 24, 2000, decision of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we *261 are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
MARILYN J. KELLY, J., dissents and states as follows:
Due to substantial similarities between this case and Hazle v. Ford Motor Co. (Docket No. 116162), ___ Mich. ___, 619 N.W.2d 535, I would hold this case in abeyance pending the decision in Hazle. Both cases involve claims of failure to promote on the basis of race and questions of establishing the elements of a prima facie case in the context of failure to promote. Specifically, the issue presented in both cases is the level of proof necessary to create an inference of unlawful discrimination. I believe our resolution of the issue in Hazle will aid in resolving the issue presented here. Therefore, I would hold the application in abeyance for Hazle.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
627 N.W.2d 260, 464 Mich. 865, 2001 Mich. LEXIS 1085, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/powe-v-michigan-dept-of-corrections-mich-2001.