Legal Opinion

McJunkin v. Cellasto Plastic Corp.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 29, 2000No. 110940, Calendar No. 5PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKelly, J.

Does subsection 301(5) of the Worker’s Disability Compensation Act (wdca)1 require automatic renewal of benefits when a disabled employee revokes an unreasonable refusal of reasonable employment and the employer reneges? We find that it does. Hence, we affirm the result reached by the Court of Appeals, but modify its rationale.

We conclude that, where an employee ends a period of unreasonable refusal, subsection 301(5) requires reinstatement of disability benefits. The result does not change where, as here, the employment is no longer available when the period of unreasonable refusal ends.

*593i

Plai…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Frankenmuth Mutual Insurance v. Marlette Homes, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Negri v. SlotkinMichigan Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Pulver v. Dundee Cement Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Lincoln v. General Motors Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Perez v. Keeler Brass Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 2000

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Chambers v. Trettco, IncMichigan Supreme Court · 2000
  2. People v. PashaMichigan Supreme Court · 2002
  3. Perez v. Keeler Brass Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 2000
  4. People v. VasquezMichigan Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Inter Cooperative Council v. Department of TreasuryMichigan Court of Appeals · 2003

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API