Michigan
How Braden v. University of Kentucky applies in Michigan: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Employment Law.
Michigan recognizes the principles established in Braden v. University of Kentucky with respect to employment discrimination and retaliation claims. State courts emphasize the need for a clear burden-shifting framework that aligns with Michigan's Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act (ELCRA).
Under Michigan law, to establish a prima facie case of retaliation, a plaintiff must demonstrate that they engaged in protected activity, suffered adverse employment action, and there is a causal connection between the two.
The court held that an employee's complaint about discriminatory practices constituted protected activity under the ELCRA.
The court affirmed that adverse employment actions include both economic and non-economic factors which affect the working environment.
This case clarified that a plaintiff can establish a retaliatory motive through circumstantial evidence.
Michigan's approach mirrors that of federal employment law, particularly under Title VII, in that both employ a burden-shifting framework for retaliation claims. However, Michigan’s Elliott-Larsen Act may offer broader protections, addressing state-specific aspects of employment discrimination.
Knowledge of the principles from Braden v. University of Kentucky, along with Michigan's retaliation framework under the ELCRA, is essential for the Michigan Bar Exam, especially in the context of employment law.