Legal Opinion

Guss v. Ford Motor Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 2, 1936No. Docket No. 66, Calendar No. 38,601PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWiest, J.

March 20, 1934, plaintiff made application for compensation under the workmen’s compensation act (2 Comp. Laws 1929, § 8407 et seq.) stating — “that the accident upon which claim for compensation is based in this matter occurred .on the -day of June, 1925, * * # and was caused by - resulting in temporary inability to use right foot developing into amputation of right leg above knee,” and asked for — “temporary total disability for about 75 weeks and specific disability for 175 weeks under 2 Comp. Laws 1929, § 8426, at $14 per week.”

Defendant denied any accidental injury or disability arising…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Panozzo v. Ford Motor Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Martilla v. Quincy Mining Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1923
  3. Jaquith v. W. M. Ackerman Electric Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1932

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. McLean v. Eaton Manfg. Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Hartsell v. Richmond Lumber Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1986
  3. Thomas v. Griffin Wheel Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1967
  4. Fitzpatrick v. Olds Division of General Motors Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1937
  5. East Jordan Iron Works v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardMichigan Court of Appeals · 1983

15 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