Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Coombe v. Penegor

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 10, 1957No. Docket 23, Calendar 46,733Published

1ConcurrenceDethmers, C. J.

I concur in affirmance of the award to plaintiff.

To avoid further confusion, it should be observed that whether a plaintiff’s work was such as “required a degree of physical exertion not shown to have been unusual to or greater than that ordinarily experienced in the general field of common labor” is the test which has been employed by this Court, as in McGregor v. Conservation Department, 338 Mich 93; Nichols v. Central Crate & Box Co., 340 Mich 232; and Simpson v. Matthes, 343 Mich 125, only for the purpose of determining whether an accidental or fortuitous causal event had occurred such as…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Sheppard v. Michigan National BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Adams v. Acme White Lead & Color WorksMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
  3. Underwood v. National Motor Castings Division, Campbell, Wyant & Cannon Foundry Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1951
  4. Samels v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1947
  5. Nichols v. Central Crate & Box Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1954

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API