NORDE JAMES III V CITY OF DETROIT
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
NORDE JAMES III,
UNPUBLISHED
February 25, 2000
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
ISAIAH MCKINNON, CITY OF DETROIT and
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF POLICE
COMMISSIONERS,
No. 212186
Wayne Circuit Court
LC No. 97-722388 NO
Defendants-Appellants.
Before: Cavanagh, P.J., and White and Talbot, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Defendants appeal by leave granted the trial court’s order granting plaintiff’s motion to compel
the production of documents in a wrongful discharge suit brought under the Whistleblowers’ Protection
Act (WPA), MCL 15.361 et seq.; MSA 17.428(1) et seq. This Court granted defendants leave to file
this interlocutory appeal. We affirm.
Defendants argue that the trial court abused its discretion in ordering the production of sergeant
and lieutenant promotional examinations, including answers and scoring records and, for in camera
review, the internal affairs investigation files of two individuals regarding examination cheating. We
disagree. This Court reviews a trial court’s decision to grant or deny discovery for an abuse of
discretion. Mercy Mt Clemens Corp v Auto Club Ins Ass’n, 219 Mich App 46, 50; 555 NW2d 871
(1996).
“Michigan law is strongly committed to open and far-reaching discovery and generally provides
for discovery of any relevant, nonprivileged matter.” LeGendre v Monroe Co, 234 Mich App 708,
721-722; 600 NW2d 78 (1999); see also MCR 2.302(B)(1). Evidence is relevant when it has any
tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action
more probable or less probable that it would be without the evidence. MRE 401; Yates v Keane, 184
Mich App 80, 82; 457 NW2d 693 (1990). Where necessary, a trial court may enter a protective
order to govern the method and scope of discovery. MCR 2.302(C); Domako v Rowe, 438 Mich
347, 362; 475 NW2d 30 (1991).
-1
After a thorough review, we find no abuse of discretion. Although defendants correctly observe
that plaintiff’s success under the WPA does not depend upon the validity of the allegations of
misconduct, the validity of the allegations may nonetheless be relevant to defendants’ motives to
terminate plaintiff’s employment. Plaintiff alleged that he was terminated from the Detroit Police
Department after he informed then Chief of Police, defendant Isaiah McKinnon, that he received
information that some department members may have obtained copies of the promotional examinations
in advance, and that he intended to pursue criminal charges against all persons involved. The
examination materials and internal investigation files could reveal the validity of the alleged impropriety
and thus lend support to plaintiff’s claims that defendants’ true motivation for terminating plaintiff was to
conceal the fact that the alleged impropriety was connected to McKinnon and his staff, and/or to punish
plaintiff for vowing to pursue the matter. Eckstein v Kuhn, 160 Mich App 240, 246; 408 NW2d 131
(1987). Furthermore, in light of the comprehensive protective order the trial court entered with respect
to the requested documents, we find no merit to defendants’ claim that their production would
compromise the integrity of federal1 and internal investigations, possible future criminal investigations,
and future examinations.
Affirmed.
/s/ Mark J. Cavanagh
/s/ Helene N. White
/s/ Michael J. Talbot
1
The federal investigation is closed.
-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.
