Nummer v. Department of Treasury
Michigan Supreme Court
1DissentMallett, J.
(dissenting.) We disagree with the majority and would hold that the doctrine of collateral estoppel does not apply to Civil Service Commission decisions because the Legislature intended the Civil Rights Act to abrogate the common-law rules of preclusion. Thus, we would affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals and allow the plaintiff to relitigate issues of discrimination in *557circuit court following a final determination by the Civil Service Commission.
i
Generally, collateral estoppel applies to an administrative agency’s final decision. Lilienthal v City of Wyandotte, 286 Mich 604; 282 NW…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Kremer v. Chemical Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Beacon Theatres, Inc. v. WestoverSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- University of Tennessee v. ElliottSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Astoria Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. SoliminoSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.