Legal Opinion · Dissent

Petersen v. Magna Corp.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 31, 2009No. Docket 136542 and 136543Published

1DissentMarkman, J.

Because I disagree with the majority interpretation of the statute in controversy, MCL 418.315, I respectfully dissent.1

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiff, a truck driver, fell off his truck and injured his back while working. He sought workers’ compensation benefits under the Worker’s Disability Compensation *351Act (WDCA), MCL 418.101 et seq. The magistrate granted benefits and medical costs to plaintiff, and also imposed $46,034 against defendants for plaintiffs attorney fees pursuant to MCL 418.315(1).2 The Workers’ Compensation Appellate Commission (WCAC) affirmed.

The Court of Appeals initially denied…

2Cases cited96 opinions

  1. Marbury v. MadisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1803
  2. Roper v. SimmonsSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
  3. Robinson v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Rory v. Continental InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 2005
  5. Sun Valley Foods Co. v. WardMichigan Supreme Court · 1999

91 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