Ward v. Siano

I concur with the majority’s conclusion that Mazumder v Univ of Michigan Regents, 270 Mich App 42; 715 NW2d 96 (2006), inaptly applied judicial estoppel to alleviate the undesirable retroactive effects1 of Waltz v Wyse, 469 Mich 642; 677 NW2d 813 (2004). I write separately to ask the Supreme Court to grant leave and issue a full and final opinion (rather than a remand order) regarding the propriety of prospective or retroactive application of Waltz.

*721i. THE ISSUE

Unfortunately, much of the commotion created by Waltz has focused on one of two questions: whether MCL 600.5852 is a statute of…