Legal Opinion

Berger v. Mead

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided July 11, 1983No. Docket 63903PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Per curiam

Occasionally, we on this Court find some opinions difficult to write. A party’s injury can so strongly call for compensation that we feel strongly inclined to at least allow the case to go before a jury. Unfortunately, as in this case, the law is too clear on the subject. The Legislature has clearly pre-empted this area thus giving us very little leeway.

This is the second time this case is before this Court. The first time, the trial judge had dismissed the complaint against all defendants based on the Worker’s Disability Compensation Act’s exclusive remedy provision and on governmental…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Connor v. Great Western Savings & Loan Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  2. CAF Investment Co. v. Saginaw TownshipMichigan Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Nichol v. BillotMichigan Supreme Court · 1979
  4. Renfroe v. Higgins Rack Coating & Manufacturing Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1969
  5. Delgado v. LohmarSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Brassinga v. City of Mountain ViewCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  2. Harris v. VernierMichigan Court of Appeals · 2000
  3. Clark v. United Technologies Automotive, IncMichigan Supreme Court · 1999
  4. Holmes v. Kraus (In Re Kraus)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan · 1984
  5. Chrysler Corp. v. Ford Motor Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1997

15 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