Harvey v. General Motors Corporation
Cases that cite this one
1 later published case cites this decision.
- In re Valdez (Mich. 2008)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
Dorothy M. HARVEY, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant.
Supreme Court of Michigan.
Order
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 23, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. However, we would note that the Workers' Compensation Appellate Commission erred in stating that an employee does not need to demonstrate a connection between wage loss and the work-related injury. An employee is indeed required to demonstrate such a connection. See MCL 418.301(4); Sington v. Chrysler Corp., 467 Mich. 144, 160-161, 648 N.W.2d 624 (2002).
MICHAEL F. CAVANAGH and MARILYN J. KELLY, JJ., would deny leave to appeal without the further statement found in the majority's order.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.