Recent Cases - Michigan Supreme Court

SUPREME COURT

The Supreme Court issued an order in Simpson v Borbolla Construction & Concrete Supply, Inc (SC Docket No. 133274, order entered December 7, 2007). The Supreme Court vacated the published opinion of the Court of Appeals saying the Court of Appeals’ panel “erroneously held that Rakestraw v Gen Dynamics Land Sys, Inc, 469 Mich 220 (2003), does not apply” to this case.

The Court of Appeals in Simpson had held that the Rakestraw rule does not apply where the pre-existing condition is work-related. Put differently, the Court of Appeals in Simpson restricted the application of Rakestraw to cases presenting pre-existing non-work-related conditions. It is this aspect of the Court of Appeals’ decision the Supreme Court vacated.

The Supreme Court did affirm the result in the case, however, for the reasons stated in the Workers’ Compensation Appellate Commission opinion. The Appellate Commission had held the last employer liable because plaintiff’s work there aggravated plaintiff’s prior work injury in a medically distinguishable manner so as to satisfy Rakestraw’s requirement.

Justice Kelly concurred in the result, but would not have vacated the Court of Appeals’ Rakestraw analysis.

As of the time these case summaries are submitted, we are still awaiting the ruling of the Supreme Court in Stokes v DaimlerChrysler Corp, n/k/a Chrysler LLC. Stokes had been orally argued before the Supreme Court on the employer’s application for leave to appeal on October 4, 2007. Stokes addresses the parties’ respective burdens of proof on disability under Sington v Chrysler Corp, 467 Mich 144; 648 NW2d 624 (2002).

Another workers’ compensation case was recently orally argued at the Supreme Court on the employer’s application for leave to appeal. The case is Gee v Arthur B. Myr Industries, Inc (SC Docket No. 133762). The case involves the applicability of res judicata to a claim for family-provided attendant care under MCL 418.315.