Legal Opinion

Pilgrim v. Menthen

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 18, 1950No. Docket 44, Calendar 44,700PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCarr, J.

The facts in this case are not in material dispute. On the 28th of August, 1948, and for some time prior thereto, plaintiff was employed as a dishwasher in the restaurant of defendant Menthen at Clare, Michigan. Her hours were from 6 p.m. to 2:30 a.m. On the date mentioned she fell as she was entering the restaurant, and sustained a fractured hip. As a result of the injury she made application for compensation under the provisions of the workmen’s compensation law of the State. *

Following a hearing before a deputy commissioner an award for total disability was made to plaintiff. The workmen’s…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Daniel v. Murray Corp. of AmericaMichigan Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Simpson v. Lee & CadyMichigan Supreme Court · 1940
  3. Hickman v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1950
  4. State Treasurer v. Kaiser-Frazer Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1950
  5. Lauscher v. Montgomery Ward & Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1950

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Dyer v. Sears, Roebuck & CompanyMichigan Supreme Court · 1957
  2. MacK v. Reo Motors, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1956
  3. Tegels v. Kaiser-Frazer Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Kelly v. Dixie Fuel & Supply Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1951
  5. Stornant v. Licari-Packard Grosse Pointe, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1952

8 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