TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Baldwin v. Chrysler Corp.

Baldwin v. Chrysler Corporation

Baldwin v. Chrysler Corp., 240 N.W.2d 266 (Mich. Ct. App. 1976)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Michigan Court of Appeals · State Appellate Courts
Decided
January 27, 1976
Docket
No. 23292
Judges
Gillis, Quinn, Noble
Citations
240 N.W.2d 26667 Mich. App. 611976 Mich. App. LEXIS 1151

Opinion — Quinn

Quinn, J.

Second Injury Fund appeals from a decision by the Workmens’ Compensation Appeal Board which awarded plaintiff total and permanent disability benefits from January 12, 1946. It is undisputed that plaintiff is entitled to benefits. The issue is when do those benefits begin.

Plaintiff was injured August 17, 1943, while employed by defendant Chrysler Corporation. As a result of the injury, plaintiff’s left leg was amputated. Prior to this injury, plaintiff lost the industrial use of his right leg due to polio. Defendant Chrysler Corporation voluntarily paid the specific loss benefits for 200 weeks as the statute then required. The 200-week period expired July 5, 1947. Thereafter, plaintiff was steadily employed elsewhere until 1970.

February 10, 1972, plaintiff first petitioned for total and permanent disability benefits. MCLA 418.833(1); MSA 17.237(833X1) provides:

"If payment of compensation is made, other than medical expenses, and an application for further compensation is later filed with the bureau, no compensation shall be ordered for any period which is more than one year prior to the date of filing of such application.”

We do not read the foregoing as a statute of limitations, but rather as a limit on the Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board’s authority to order the payment of benefits. Thus any benefits awarded prior to February 10, 1971, would not be authorized by law, and the order appealed from is erroneous as far as it requires payments prior to February 10, 1971.

*63 This conclusion makes moot the second issue. The Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board ordered six per cent interest on accrued benefits. Plaintiff concedes this was error and that the interest rate should be five per cent.

The order appealed from is amended to require benefit payments retroactive to February 10, 1971, with five per cent interest on accrued benefits. Otherwise the order is affirmed without costs.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1976: 11978: 41985: 11986: 119762026peak 1978 · 4

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Howard v. General Motors Corp.399 N.W.2d 10 (Mich. 1986)
  2. Rice v. Michigan Sugar Co.269 N.W.2d 202 (Mich. Ct. App. 1978)
  3. Bailey v. General Motors Corp.268 N.W.2d 537 (Mich. Ct. App. 1978)
  4. Franks v. White Pine Copper Division375 N.W.2d 715 (Mich. 1985)
  5. Kleinschrodt v. General Motors Corp.263 N.W.2d 246 (Mich. 1978)
  6. White v. Weinberger Builders, Inc.242 N.W.2d 427 (Mich. 1976)

Most recent

  1. Howard v. General Motors Corp.399 N.W.2d 10 (Mich. 1986)
  2. Franks v. White Pine Copper Division375 N.W.2d 715 (Mich. 1985)
  3. Cupples v. Amec, Inc.269 N.W.2d 653 (Mich. Ct. App. 1978)
  4. Rice v. Michigan Sugar Co.269 N.W.2d 202 (Mich. Ct. App. 1978)
  5. Bailey v. General Motors Corp.268 N.W.2d 537 (Mich. Ct. App. 1978)
  6. Kleinschrodt v. General Motors Corp.263 N.W.2d 246 (Mich. 1978)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list