Ross v. Acrisure P1, LLC Digest no. 7.39 Section 28(1)(c) Cite as: Ross v. Acrisure P1, LLC, Unpublished Opinion of the Court of Appeals of Michigan, Issued August 14, 2014 (Docket no. 315347). Appeal Pending: No Claimant: Michael T. Ross (Appellee) Employer: Hill’s Crate Mill (Appellants: UIA) Docket no. 315347 Date of decision: Aug. 14,… Read More »
Kempf v Michigan Bell Telephone Co Digest no. 9.02 Section 28a Cite as: Kempf v Michigan Bell Telephone Co, 137 Mich App 574 (1984); lv den, 424 Mich 857 (1985). Appeal pending: No Claimant: Maureen Kempf Employer: Michigan Bell Telephone Co. Docket no.: B81 03615 77481 Date of decision: September 17, 1984 View/download the full decision COURT OF… Read More »
COURT OF APPEALS HOLDING: The distinction in Section 44(5)(a) and (c) of the MES Act as to the treatment of disability payments as wages depending on whether the disability benefits are paid directly to an employee or through a disability plan does not constitute a denial of equal protection.