In Cuddington v United Health Servs, Inc, No. 322102 (Mich Ct App January 12, 2016) a longtime employee was involved in a work-related automobile accident and then terminated the day after he notified his employer he would miss work due to injury. The employee made a claim of retaliatory-discharge under the Worker's Disability Compensation Act, MCL 418.101, et seq. He successfully withstood the summary disposition phase on his claim** and then proceeded to trial.

After trial the jury reached a no cause of action verdict; the trial court upheld the verdict despite the employee's post-trial briefing/motions. The employee then appealed the verdict and the trial court's denial of post-verdict relief, citing multiple theories of error (e.g., that the verdict was against the great weight of the evidence). The Michigan Court of Appeals ultimately affirmed the jury's verdict as well as the trial court's rulings on the evidentiary challenges, noting that it did not find itself in a position to reweigh the evidence or second guess the jury and trial court where the medical record, although favorable to the employee, was "scant."

**For reference see Cuddington v United Health Servs, Inc, 298 Mich App 264, 826 NW2d 519 (2012) (holding "[the employee] had a right to seek medical consultation concerning his employment-related injury," and "[b]ecause MCL 418.301(13) contemplates that an employee may pursue a retaliation claim arising from the exercise of this right, the trial court improperly granted summary disposition to [the employer].").