Legal Opinion
Wurtz v. Beecher Metropolitan District
Michigan Court of Appeals
Decided October 2, 2012No. Docket No. 301752PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJansen, J.
Plaintiff appeals by right an order granting summary disposition to defendants in this action under the Whistleblowers’ Protection Act (WPA).1 We reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
This case pertains to the last two years of plaintiffs employment with Beecher Metropolitan District. The district provides water and sewage services to approximately 4,000 residential and commercial customers *78near Flint. The three individually named defendants, McClain, Corlew, and Thorn, were three of five elected board members for the district…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Maiden v. RozwoodMichigan Supreme Court · 1999
- West v. General Motors Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 2003
- Wilkerson v. New Media Technology Charter School Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2008
- Leibowitz v. Cornell UniversityCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2009
- Carolyn Carter v. University of ToledoCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2003
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Wurtz v. Beecher Metropolitan DistrictMichigan Supreme Court · 2014
- Foster v. JudnicDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2013
- Bruce Whitman v. City of BurtonMichigan Court of Appeals · 2015
- Bruce Whitman v. City of BurtonMichigan Court of Appeals · 2015
- Matthew Williams v. Paul Shapiro MdMichigan Court of Appeals · 2018
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.