|
No. 133170
| Chathapuram S. Ramanathan, |
|
Ann Curry Thompson |
Plaintiff-Appellee, |
|
|
| v |
(Appeal from Ct of Appeals) |
|
|
(Wayne - Sapala, M.) |
|
|
| Wayne State University Board of Governors, |
|
Susan Healy Zitterman |
Defendant-Appellant, |
|
|
and |
|
|
| Leon Chestang, |
|
|
| Defendant. |
|
|
| __________________________________________ |
|
|
Click to view briefs in Adobe format:
Plaintiff-Appellee's Brief in Opposition to Application for Leave to Appeal>>
Plaintiff-Appellee's Reply Brief>>
Plaintiff-Appellee's Supplemental Brief>>
Defendant-Appellant's Application for Leave to Appeal>>
Defendant-Appellant's Supplemental Brief>>
Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan's Amicus Curiae Brief>>
City of Detroit, Meijer, Inc., and Michigan Municipal League Liability & Property Pool's Concurrence Amici Curiae Brief>>
Background
Chathapuram Ramanathan, an Asian Indian professor, was hired by Dean Leon Chestang in August 1992. Ramanathan felt that subsequent comments made by a fellow professor and by staff, including Chestang’s references to a Sitar and curried lamb at two 1993 faculty meetings, were insensitive and showed an anti-Asian Indian animus. Also in 1993, Chestang informed Ramanathan that his teaching contract would not be renewed at the conclusion of a one-year extension. When Ramanathan applied for tenure, the School Promotion & Tenure Committee voted 3 to 1 to grant tenure, although Chestang disagreed, finding Ramanathan’s work to be second-rate. In April 1995, the university Provost, who made the final decision, informed Ramanathan that he would not be receiving tenure. In 1998, Ramanathan sued Wayne State University and Chestang; Ramanathan claimed that he had suffered discrimination based on race and national origin, in violation of Michigan’s Civil Rights Act. Ultimately, the Court of Appeals determined, in an unpublished opinion, that Ramanathan could support his claim by presenting evidence of the comments Chestang made at the 1993 faculty meetings. Wayne State argued that the comments are not admissible evidence because they were made five years before Ramanathan filed this lawsuit, and therefore fall outside the three-year limitations period for Civil Rights Act claims. The university contended that the arguments were supported by the Michigan Supreme Court’s recent decision in Garg v Macomb Co Community Mental Health Services, 472 Mich 263 (2005), amended 473 Mich 1205 (2005). But the Court of Appeals said that it did not read the Garg opinion “so broadly as to exclude per se all background evidence of alleged discriminatory or retaliatory acts occurring outside the limitations period.” Accordingly, the Court of Appeals held that evidence of Chestang’s 1993 remarks “is subject to the rules of evidence and other applicable governing law, and its admissibility is within the discretion of the trial court.” The Court of Appeals panel also rejected the defendant’s argument that the evidence, even if admissible, was insufficient to sustain Ramanathan’s claim of retaliation and discriminatory animus. Wayne State appeals.
Top of Page
|
