M Civ JI 107.11 Whistleblowers’ Protection Act: Distinction in Standard of Proof Between “Report” and “About to Report”

If the plaintiff claims that he or she reported a violation or suspected violation of law or regulation to a public body, the plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that [ he / she ] made such a report.

If the plaintiff claims that he or she was about to report a violation or suspected violation of law or regulation to a public body, the plaintiff must prove by clear and convincing evidence that he or she was about to report such a violation.

Note on Use

This instruction should be followed by the definitions of preponderance and clear and convincing evidence in M Civ JI 8.01.

This instruction must be given whenever “about to report” is an issue in the case.

Comment

The clear and convincing requirement for an employee “about to report” a violation or suspected violation is found in MCL 15.363(4).

History

M Civ JI 107.11 was added April 1, 2002.