Stokes v. CHRYSLER LLC
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
*270MARKMAN, J.
We heard oral argument on defendant employer’s application for leave to appeal to consider whether the burden-shifting analysis articulated by the Court of Appeals relieved claimant of the burden of proving that he was disabled from all jobs paying the maximum wages within his qualifications and training, as required by Sington v Chrysler Corp, 467 Mich 144; 648 NW2d 624 (2002). A workers’ compensation claimant bears the burden of proving that he has a disability under MCL 418.301(4), and that burden does not shift to the employer. MCL 418.851. The claimant must show more than a…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- DiBenedetto v. West Shore HospitalMichigan Supreme Court · 2000
- Mudel v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 2000
- Aquilina v. General Motors Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1978
- Sington v. Chrysler CorporationMichigan Supreme Court · 2002
- Haske v. Transport Leasing, Inc., IndianaMichigan Supreme Court · 1997
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- Clifton Jackson v. Sedgwick Claims Management Servs.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2013
- Brown v. Cassens Transport Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2012
- Omian v. Chrysler Group LLCMichigan Court of Appeals · 2015
- Lofton v. Autozone, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 2008
- Bolte v. JoyCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1989
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.