Faircloth v. Family Independence Agency

*414Cavanagh, J.

{concurring in part and dissenting in part). I join in parts n and in of the majority opinion. I dissent from part iv, however, because I believe that defendants’ interpretation of 1991 PA 111, subsection 805(l)(b) resulted in an unjustifiably restrictive standard of eligibility for disability benefits that was contrary to the intent of the Legislature.

Subsection 805(l)(b) provides that persons eligible for the state disability program include “[a] person who is medically diagnosed as incapacitated and unavailable for work for at least 90 days.” To determine eligibility under this…