Legal Opinion

Nederhood v. Cadillac Malleable Iron Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 31, 1994No. Docket Nos. 94110, 94299, (Calendar Nos. 3-4)PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrickley, J.

We granted leave in these cases to determine whether the Worker’s Compensation Appeal Board and the Court of Appeals erred in concluding that the plaintiffs-appellants were disqualified from receiving worker’s compensation benefits because they left favored work to participate in a strike that resulted in the use of permanent replacements. In deciding this issue, we must determine whether the hiring of permanent replacement workers obligates an employer to renew its offer of favored work to its injured employees, or whether the employee must take action to reinstate benefits. In the case of…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Bower v. Whitehall Leather Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Powell v. Casco Nelmor Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Pigue v. General Motors Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1947
  4. Kolenko v. United States Rubber Products, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1938
  5. P. P. G. Industries, Inc. v. AitesCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1973

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Derr v. Murphy Motor Freight LinesMichigan Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Michales v. Morton Salt Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Colbert v. Conybeare Law OfficeMichigan Court of Appeals · 2000
  4. Ladd v. Grinnell Corp.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1999
  5. Sweatt v. Department of CorrectionsMichigan Court of Appeals · 2001

11 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