McCracken v. City of Detroit
291 Mich. App. 522
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Plaintiffs are Caucasian Emergency Medical Services employees of the City of Detroit Fire Department who sued for race discrimination and hostile work environment under the Civil Rights Act.
- Defendants answered and attached separately labeled special and affirmative defenses, demanding a response to the defenses.
- Plaintiffs did not respond to the affirmative defenses within 21 days.
- Defendants moved for judgment and later for summary disposition asserting the failure to respond to affirmative defenses amounted to an admission.
- Trial court held that plaintiffs were required to respond and granted summary disposition.
- Court reverses, holding affirmative defenses are not pleadings requiring a response and should be taken as denied if not responded to, then remands for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are affirmative defenses pleadings requiring a response under MCR 2.110? | Plaintiffs | Defendants | No; affirmative defenses are not pleadings requiring a response |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Forfeiture of a Quantity of Marijuana, 291 Mich App 243 (2011) (affirmative defenses not pleadings under MCR 2.110(A))
- Vannoy v City of Warren, 15 Mich App 158 (1968) (failure to respond not controlling when no reply demanded in defenses)
- Simonson v Michigan Life Ins Co, 37 Mich App 79 (1971) (affirmative defenses; distinguishable facts; not controlling here)