adopting the dissenting opinion in Fuhr v Trinity Health Corp, unpublished per curiam opinion of the Court of Appeals, issued April 16, 2013 (Docket No. 309877), which in turn adopted Scott's rule for disregarding testimony that is so "blatantly contradicted by the record" that "no reasonable jury could believe it" when deciding whether there was a genuine issue of material fact in a motion for summary disposition

adopting the dissenting opinion in Fuhr v Trinity Health Corp, unpublished per curiam opinion of the Court of Appeals, issued April 16, 2013 (Docket No. 309877), which in turn adopted Scott's rule for disregarding testimony that is so "blatantly contradicted by the record" that "no reasonable jury could believe it" when deciding whether there was a genuine issue of material fact in a motion for summary disposition

In Fuhr, the plaintiff did not claim he was terminated because he contacted the United States Attorney until he was deposed and the evidence indicated that the decision to terminate the plaintiff was made before the plaintiff did so.

In Fuhr, our Supreme Court overruled this Court's unpublished decision and remanded for entry of summary disposition in favor of the defendants "for the reasons stated in the Court of Appeals dissenting opinion."