Dyer v. Sears, Roebuck & Company

{after stating the facts). This case revives the contentious debate our reports disclose since the tenets of Haller v. City of Lansing, 195 Mich 753 (LRA1917E, 324) (and Brink v. J. W. Wells Lumber Co., 229 Mich 35) came to veiled doubt in Luteran v. Ford Motor Co., 313 Mich 487. Prior to Luteran’s premonitory prelude — that Haller “goes to the extreme” — , and at least until Daniel* *94and Hickman* were handed down, onr decisions definitely and relevantly committed the workmen’s compensation act to that interpretation which accorded then and accords now with the known weight of American and…