Legal Opinion
Miller v. C a Muer Corp.
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided January 15, 1985No. Docket Nos. 71647, 72852. (Calendar Nos. 9, 10)PublishedCited by 73 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLevin, J.
In these cases, consolidated on appeal, the defendant employers promulgated antinepotism policies applicable to the employment of rela tives, including spouses. The principal question is whether the policies impermissibly discriminate on the basis of "marital status” within the meaning of § 202 of the Michigan civil rights act. We hold that the policies are not facially discriminatory. We remand, however, for further consideration because impermissible discrimination may occur in the application of a policy not facially discriminatory.
A
Plaintiff Curt Miller worked as a waiter at a restaurant…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Loving v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Zablocki v. RedhailSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- City of Los Angeles Department of Water v. ManhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Washington Water Power Co. v. Washington State Human Rights CommissionWashington Supreme Court · 1978
- Manhattan Pizza Hut, Inc. v. New York State Human Rights Appeal BoardNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by73 opinions
- Radtke v. EverettMichigan Supreme Court · 1993
- Veenstra v. Washtenaw Country ClubMichigan Supreme Court · 2002
- Muller v. BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1996
- Graham v. FordMichigan Court of Appeals · 2000
- Landin v. Healthsource Saginaw, Inc.Michigan Court of Appeals · 2014
68 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.