McKenna v. Chevrolet-Saginaw Grey Iron Foundry Division

It is with extreme reluctance that I concur in the result reached by Judge Walsh.

I do so separately because I want to record my previously expressed concern over the state of the Michigan Workmen’s Compensation Act. See the concurring opinion in Brady v Ford Motor Co, 62 Mich App 520; 233 NW2d 631 (1975).

There is no reason in law or logic why plaintiff, who manifestly has lost the industrial use of both legs, should be treated differently from those in the same condition but not as a result of silicosis, except that the Legislature, intentionally or not, said he must. When the Legislature…