The Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act (ELCRA); Quid pro quo sexual harassment; Hamood v Trinity Health Corp; Hostile work environment based on sexual harassment; Statute of limitations; MCL 600.5805(2)

While the court held that the trial court did not err in dismissing plaintiff-Bellestri’s quid pro quo sexual harassment claim under MCR 2.116(C)(7), it erred in dismissing her hostile work environment claim. Plaintiff sued her employer, defendant-Costco, related to alleged sexual harassment perpetrated by defendant-Williams, “who was a supervisor at Costco up until the time that he was sentenced to prison for raping and physically assaulting her” in 2021. As to her quid pro quo claim, it was “undisputed that Williams was Bellestri’s supervisor prior to his demotion and transfer on” 8/31/18. But nothing in the amended complaint or the documentary evidence indicated “that Costco left Williams in a position capable of offering Bellestri tangible job benefits in exchange for sexual favors or with the ability to threaten her job based upon her failure to submit to his demands for sexual favors.” He ceased being her “supervisor. His alleged ability to threaten her career at Costco was dependent upon his alleged influence and friendship with individuals who were actually in a position to take a tangible employment action against Bellestri. Influence with individuals with authority over the plaintiff cannot form the basis for a quid pro quo sexual harassment claim.” Thus, she failed to allege any “conduct by Williams within the statutory limitations period that can form the basis for” this claim. But the court concluded she alleged conduct forming the basis for her hostile work environment claim that occurred after 8/31/18. She alleged that “Williams was again promoted by Costco to a supervisory position. He then contacted her. He threatened to destroy her career if she did not submit to a sexual relationship with him.” Among other things, he told her he was able “to influence her supervisors based upon his friendship with them. Bellestri alleged that, using that influence, Williams was able to affect her employment by having her paid time off canceled or scheduled for his benefit. He also allegedly used” it to prevent her from obtaining a transfer. And she asserted in an affidavit that “in 2020 and 2021 she reported to multiple supervisors and managers that Williams[] was threatening her employment if she did not engage in a sexual relationship with him. That report is sufficient to put Costco on notice of the ongoing nature of Williams’s sexual harassment.” Affirmed in part and reversed in part.