DAPHNIE BOBO V THORN APPLE VALLEY INC
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
DAPHNIE BOBO,
UNPUBLISHED
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v
No. 184775
Wayne Circuit Court
LC No. 94427024 CZ
THORN APPLE VALLEY, INC. a Michigan
corporation, and JOHN COOL,
Defendant-Appellee.
Before: Marilyn Kelly, P.J., and MacKenzie and J.R. Ernst,* JJ.
MARILYN KELLY, P.J. (dissenting).
I respectfully dissent.
The trial court erred in ruling that a waiver of the time for bringing a civil rights claim need not be
treated differently from waivers for other types of claims. Although I agree with the majority’s finding of
error, I disagree that the error was harmless.
Employers and employees often do not deal at arms length when negotiating employment
contracts, such as the one in this case. Recently, the Michigan Supreme Court held that these contracts
deserve close judicial scrutiny. Herweyer v Clark Highway Services, Inc, 455 Mich 14, 21; 564
NW2d 857 (1997). Because of the trial court’s erroneous summary disposition ruling, it never
addressed whether plaintiff knowingly and voluntarily waived her right to sue more than six months after
her employment terminated. Therefore, the contract’s abbreviated limitation period did not receive the
judicial scrutiny required by Herweyer.
Moreover, it is unclear whether plaintiff voluntarily and knowingly agreed to waive the three
year statutory period for bringing suit. She testified that, when she signed the acceptance form, she had
not been given a copy of the handbook and did not have the opportunity to read it before signing. The
facts of this case differ significantly from those of Myers v Western-Southern Life Ins Co,1 relied upon
by the majority. In Myers, the plaintiff had ample time to read the terms of the employment contract
before he signed. I would remand for further discovery and a hearing.
/s/ Marilyn Kelly
* Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment.
1
849 F2d 259 (CA 6, 1988).
-2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
