HEATHER KERCHEN; LORI KERCHEN; DALE KERCHEN v. UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN; JAMES H. WOODS, CHRISTIAN RAPHALIDES; [UNKNOWN] DOES - Articles

All Content

HEATHER KERCHEN; LORI KERCHEN; DALE KERCHEN v. UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN; JAMES H. WOODS, CHRISTIAN RAPHALIDES; [UNKNOWN] DOES

Posted by: Tanja Trezise on May 6, 2024

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Brian M. Schwartz, MILLER CANFIELD, PADDOCK AND STONE, P.L.C., Detroit, Michigan, for Appellants.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Dustyn K. Coontz, COONTZ LAW, Lansing, Michigan, for Appellees.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Brian M. Schwartz, Lawrence T. Garcia, Sydney G. Rohlicek, MILLER CANFIELD, PADDOCK AND STONE, P.L.C., Detroit, Michigan, for Appellants.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Dustyn K. Coontz, COONTZ LAW, Lansing, Michigan, William B. Norman, DEFENDING OHIO, Berea, Ohio, for Appellees.

Attorneys 5: ON BRIEF: Kyla L. Barranco. OFFICE OF THE MICHIGAN ATTORNEY GENERAL, Lansing, Michigan, for Amicus Curiae.

Judge(s): COLE, CLAY, and BLOOMEKATZ, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan at Flint

CLAY, Circuit Judge. Plaintiffs Heather, Lori, and Dale Kerchen filed a complaint against Defendants the University of Michigan and Dr. James Woods, alleging violations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Michigan state law. Defendants appeal the district court’s order denying their motion to dismiss without prejudice and ordering limited discovery on whether this action is barred by the statutes of limitations applicable to Plaintiffs’ claims. For the reasons stated below, we REVERSE the district court’s denial of Defendants’ motion to dismiss, DISMISS various claims for lack of jurisdiction as specified below, and REMAND for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Attachments: