Legal Opinion

Rookledge v. Garwood

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided September 8, 1954No. Docket 38; Calendar 46,083PublishedCited by 93 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBushnell, J.

This matter involves the construction of a recent amendment to section 15, part 3, of the workmen’s compensation act, being CL 1948, § 413.15 (Stat Ann 1950 Rev §17.189). Prior to its amendment the act in effect at the time the cause of action accrued (October 22, 1951) provided:

“Where the injury for which compensation is payable under this act was caused under circumstances creating a legal liability in some person other than the employer to pay damages in respect thereof, the employee may at his option proceed either at law against that person to recover damages, or against the employer for…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Campbell v. HoltSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
  2. City of Grand Rapids v. CrockerMichigan Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Adams v. Acme White Lead & Color WorksMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
  4. City of Los Angeles v. OliverCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
  5. Harsha v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1933

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

3Cited by93 opinions

  1. In Re Certified QuestionsMichigan Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Lahti v. FosterlingMichigan Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Franks v. White Pine Copper DivisionMichigan Supreme Court · 1985
  4. Sellinger v. Freeway Mobile Home Sales, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 1974
  5. Selk v. Detroit Plastic ProductsMichigan Supreme Court · 1984

88 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