Legal Opinion

Pieczynski v. Brunswick, Balke, Collender Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 9, 1952No. Docket 31, Calendar 45,527PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtBushnell, J.

This is an appeal by the defendant employer and its insurer from an award in a hernia case. The principal question presented may be ,stated as follows: Is there any competent evidence to support the finding of the workmen’s compensation commission that plaintiff’s present hernia, which developed while working for a new and different employer, is of the recurrent type, and, therefore, related to the original hernia which she suffered while-in the employ of defendant company? Another necessary question is whether the former employer who provided a herniotomy is required to pay compensation when…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Barclay v. General Motors Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Hargrove v. Ford Motor Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1945
  3. McHan v. Bohn Aluminum & Brass Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1946

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Ash v. Great Lakes Greyhound LinesMichigan Supreme Court · 1953

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

Powered by the Exa API