Bruce Whitman v. City of Burton

I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY1

This is the third time we have addressed this case on appeal. Our Court originally adjudicated this alleged Whistleblowers’ Protection Act2 (WPA) claim in 2011, *319and our opinion3 reversed the jury award in Whitman’s favor. We held that the Michigan Supreme Court’s decision in Shallal4 barred Whitman from claiming protection under the WPA, because he admitted that his motivation for asserting his entitlement to accumulated, unused sick-leave pay under a city ordinance was entirely personal and selfish.5 We reasoned that, under Shallal, Whitman’s private motivations for…