Debano–Griffin v. Lake Cnty., Docket No. 143841.COA No. 282921.

• Decision Date: 23 March 2012
• Docket Number: Docket No. 143841.COA No. 282921.
• Citation: 809 N.W.2d 570,491 Mich. 874
• Parties: Cheryl DEBANO–GRIFFIN, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. LAKE COUNTY and Lake County Board of Commissioners, Defendants–Appellees.
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court

491 Mich. 874

809 N.W.2d 570

Cheryl DEBANO–GRIFFIN, Plaintiff–Appellant,

v.LAKE COUNTY and Lake County Board of Commissioners, Defendants–Appellees.

Docket No. 143841.COA No. 282921.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

March 23, 2012.

Prior report: Mich.App., 2011 WL 3760907.

Order

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 25, 2011 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is GRANTED. The parties shall include among the issues to be briefed: (1) whether the plaintiff established a causal connection between her protected activity and the adverse employment action under the Whistleblowers Protection Act (MCL 15.362) and, if so, (2) whether a whistleblower may challenge an adverse employment decision, which is claimed to be a matter of business judgment that was based on a fiscal or budgetary reason, as a mere pretext over the defendants' assertion that the separation of powers principle prevents the judiciary from examining the budgetary decisions of a legislative body. See Dubey v. Stroh Brewery Co., 185 Mich.App. 561, 565–566, 462 N.W.2d 758 (1990).

ZAHRA, J., did not participate because he was on the Court of Appeals panel that issued the October 15, 2009 and December 16, 2010 per curiam opinions.