Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Cain v. Waste Management, Inc

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided January 22, 2004No. Docket 242104, 242123Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partKelly, J.

Although I concur in part n (a) of the majority opinion, I respectfully disagree with the statutory analysis proffered in part II (b). In lieu of remanding to the Worker’s Compensation Appellate Commission (wcac) to allow it to provide its statutory authority and construction for awarding plaintiff total and permanent disability benefits, I would reverse the wcac’s apparent conclusion that the industrial loss of plaintiff’s leg in its uncorrected state could constitute one of the two required losses for awarding plaintiff total and permanent disability benefits under MCL 418.361(3)(b).

On…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Negri v. SlotkinMichigan Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Rowell v. Security Steel Processing Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Eversman v. Concrete Cutting & BreakingMichigan Supreme Court · 2000
  4. McCAUL v. MODERN TILE AND CARPET, INCMichigan Court of Appeals · 2002
  5. Cain v. Waste Management, IncMichigan Supreme Court · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API