Opinion ID: 2211646
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Plaintiff's Hostile Work Environment Claim

Text: I disagree with the decision to remand this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration of plaintiff's claim of hostile work environment sexual harassment. Specifically, the majority instructs the Court of Appeals to consider whether plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to demonstrate that defendant `failed to rectify a problem after adequate notice.' Op., p. 919. Although the Court of Appeals majority analyzed whether Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, [9] and Faragher v. Boca Raton, [10] should be adopted, it also observed that the jury specifically found that defendant failed to take prompt remedial action after it knew or should have known that plaintiff had been sexually harassed, a finding that is supported by the evidence presented at trial. [11] The jury was instructed under Champion and Radtke v. Everett, 442 Mich. 368, 501 N.W.2d 155 (1993). The Court of Appeals has already concluded that there is sufficient evidence for the jury's finding that defendant knew or should have known that plaintiff had been sexually harassed.