Stokes v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.
Michigan Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtWhite, J.
Defendant appeals by leave granted the en banc opinion of the Workers’ Compensation Appellate Commission (WCAC) affirming an open award of dis*574ability benefits. Defendant argues that the WCAC committed errors of law in applying the standard of disability under Sington v Chrysler Corp, 467 Mich 144; 648 NW2d 624 (2002), and in concluding that the magistrate had no general authority to grant pretrial discovery. We conclude that the WCAC reached a result in this case — affirming the magistrate’s grant of benefits— that is amply supported by the record, and affirm the result. However, because the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Mudel v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 2000
- Sington v. Chrysler CorporationMichigan Supreme Court · 2002
- Haske v. Transport Leasing, Inc., IndianaMichigan Supreme Court · 1997
- Rakestraw v. General Dynamics Land Systems, IncMichigan Supreme Court · 2003
- Boggetta v. Burroughs Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1962
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Stokes v. CHRYSLER LLCMichigan Supreme Court · 2008
- Stokes v. CHRYSLER LLCMichigan Supreme Court · 2008
- Stokes v. CHRYSLER LLCMichigan Supreme Court · 2008