Hamed v. Wayne County
490 Mich. 1
| Mich. | 2011Background
- Livingston County deputies arrested Hamed on an unpaid child-support warrant and she was later transferred to Wayne County custody.
- Wayne County jail staff, including Deputy Johnson, subjected Hamed to sexually charged conduct and ultimately Johnson sexually assaulted her during a duty shift.
- Johnson was terminated and later convicted of criminal sexual conduct.
- Plaintiff amended her complaint to add quid pro quo and hostile-environment sexual-harassment claims under MCL 37.2103(i).
- Circuit court granted summary disposition for defendants, ruling no vicarious liability under CRA; Court of Appeals reversed, applying Champion’s aid-by-agency rationale; this Court granted leave to resolve vicarious liability for quid pro quo harassment affecting public services under the CRA.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether CRA vicarious liability for quid pro quo harassment in public services follows traditional respondeat superior. | Hamed relies on Champion’s aid-by-agency approach to impose vicarious liability. | Champion is inapplicable to CRA; liability should be limited to within-scoped acts or foreseen acts. | Champion overruled; no vicarious liability for Johnson's unforeseeable, outside-scope act. |
| Whether Johnson's acts were within the scope of employment or foreseeable to impose liability on defendants. | Past misconduct and supervisory context should render Johnson's act foreseeable to defendants. | Acts were independent, outside the scope of employment; not foreseeable. | Acts were unforeseeable and outside the scope; no vicarious liability. |
| Whether Champion v Nation Wide Security, Inc should be overruled. | Champion appropriately aligns with CRA’s remedial purpose and foresees employer responsibility. | Champion conflicts with Michigan law; maintaining it creates impractical liability. | Champion overruled; legal framework aligned with CRA and Michigan common law. |
Key Cases Cited
- Champion v Nation Wide Security, Inc, 450 Mich 702 (1996) (held employer vicariously liable when supervisor used authority to commit quid pro quo harassment)
- Chambers v Trettco, Inc, 463 Mich 297 (2000) (CRA incorporates agency principles; analyzes quid pro quo/hostile environment liability)
- Zsigo v Hurley Med Ctr, 475 Mich 215 (2006) (rejected aided-by-agency exception as part of Michigan common law)
- Brown v Brown, 478 Mich 545 (2007) (foreseeability of employee misconduct as basis for vicarious liability)
- Salinas v Genesys Health Sys, 263 Mich App 315 (2004) (example of Champion’s workability in context of CRA claims)
- Hersh v Kentfield Builders, Inc, 385 Mich 410 (1969) (knowledge of past impropriety can forewarn employer (dissent cited))
- Doe v Forrest, 2004 VT 37 (2004) (Vermont approach to aided-by-agency with three-factor test (not controlling in Michigan))