RONALD P HORTON V MARY SWITZER

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS RONALD P. HORTON, UNPUBLISHED October 10, 2000 Plaintiff-Appellant, v MARY SWITZER, BRENDA BELL, and WILLIAM SLEIGHT, No. 216291 Ingham Circuit Court LC No. 96-084651-CZ Defendants, and MICHIGAN EMPLOYMENT SECURITY COMMISSION, DONNA STOERTZ, a/k/a JEANNE STOERTZ, and DALE LINDLEY, Defendants-Appellees. Before: Kelly, P.J., and Whitbeck and Collins, JJ. PER CURIAM. I concur in the result, but with considerable reluctance because it is apparent to me that the jury believed that Mr. Horton was the victim of sexual harassment. The failure of plaintiff’s proofs on damages is inexplicable, however, and can not be remedied on appeal since it was properly addressed by the lower court when it permitted plaintiff, over defendant’s objection, to reopen the proofs on economic losses. /s/ Michael J. Kelly -1

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.