Legal Opinion

Richter v. Monarch Stamping Co.

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided November 14, 1979No. Docket No. 78-3787PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

Plaintiff appeals from a Worker’s Compensation Appeal Board ruling denying him benefits for failure to comply with the 120-day notice requirement of MCL 418.441; MSA 17.237(441).

Plaintiff was employed by defendant Townsend & Bottum from May 1970 to April 1974 as a carpenter’s helper. He was also employed by the defendant Monarch from 1965 to June 1973 as a press operator and parts finisher.

In April of 1974, plaintiff suffered a hernia. *768Compensation benefits were paid through September of 1974, however, plaintiff never returned to work due to a layoff. It was during treatment of the hernia…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Lewis v. Chrysler CorporationMichigan Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Thomas v. Griffin Wheel Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1967
  3. Spartan Asphalt Paving Co. v. Tri-Cities Construction, Inc.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1976
  4. Smith v. Kelsey-Hayes Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1978
  5. Ramos v. Production Steel Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1978

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Chadwick v. Chrysler Corp.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1981

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

Powered by the Exa API