Court Opinion

ID: 9698033
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 19:40:06.968786+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:37.753422
License: Public Domain

Cavanagh, J.
I concur in the result of this Court’s per curiam opinion; however, I see no reason why the Court would need to retreat from its decision in McAuley v General Motors Corp, 457 Mich 513; 578 NW2d 282 (1998), in order to decide this case. McAuley explained that “if the prevailing party has already been fully reimbursed for reasonable attorney fees through the operation of the attorney fee provision of the Handicappers’ Civil Rights Act (hcra), there are no ‘actual costs’ remaining to be reimbursed under the court rule.” 457 Mich 523. Similar to the hcra, the Michigan Civil Rights Act (cra) allows a plaintiff to recover costs, which include reasonable attorney fees. MCL 37.2802; MSA 3.548(802). The reasoning used in McAuley seems to apply with equal force to the present case: as long as the prevailing party has been reimbursed for its “costs” under the CRA, there is nothing left to be recovered under the mediation sanction court rule.
Kelly, J., concurred with Cavanagh, J.