MICHAEL MCGEE V CITY OF DETROIT
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
MICHAEL MCGEE,
UNPUBLISHED
July 30, 2002
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v
No. 225819
Wayne Circuit Court
LC No. 98-809709-NF
CITY OF DETROIT,
Defendant-Appellee.
MICHAEL MCGEE,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
No. 225824
Wayne Circuit Court
LC No. 98-809709-NF
v
CITY OF DETROIT,
Defendant-Appellant.
_______________________________________
Before: White, P.J., and Whitbeck, C.J., and Holbrook, Jr., J.
WHITE, P.J. (concurring in part and dissenting in part).
Recognizing that the alleged supervening event in the instant case did not remove
plaintiff from the workforce as in MacDonald v State Farm Mutual Ins Co, 419 Mich 146; 350
NW2d 233 (1984), and Luberda v Farm Bureau General Ins Co, 163 Mich App 457; 415 NW2d
245 (1987), and that this case can be analogized to Marquis v Hartford Accident & Indemnity
(After Remand), 444 Mich 638; 513 NW2d 799 (1994), where the plaintiff voluntarily quit
favored work, I conclude that there was a question of fact whether plaintiff would have earned
wages, even after the drug test, were it not for the accident.
I agree that there was a question of fact whether the drug test was valid, and also agree
that plaintiff is not entitled to twelve percent interest under MCL 600.6013(5).
Lastly, I do not agree that the trial court erred in denying mediation sanctions. “Verdict”
includes a jury verdict and a judgment entered as a result of a ruling on a motion after rejection
-1-
of the mediation evaluation. The “verdict” in the instant case was a product of both; in fact, the
ruling on the motion played the largest factor in the ultimate “verdict.” There is nothing in MCR
2.403(O) to preclude the trial court’s approach. The trial court’s reasoning was sound and
should be affirmed.
/s/ Helene N. White
-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.