Hakkinen v. Lake Superior District Power Co.

Michigan Court of Appeals

Hakkinen v. Lake Superior District Power Co.

221 N.W.2d 202, 54 Mich. App. 451, 1974 Mich. App. LEXIS 1259

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 24, 1974

DocketDocket 18261, 18262

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 221 N.W.2d 202 (Hakkinen v. Lake Superior District Power Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hakkinen v. Lake Superior District Power Co., 221 N.W.2d 202, 54 Mich. App. 451, 1974 Mich. App. LEXIS 1259 (Mich. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinions

Quinn, J.

The basic facts involved in this litigation are found in Hakkinen v Northern Advertising Co, 38 Mich App 506; 196 NW2d 863 (1972). The concluding paragraph of that opinion reads:

"The case is remanded to the Bureau of Workmen’s [453]*453Compensation for action in accordance with this opinion, after final determination of the third-party action now pending in circuit court.”

In context with the full opinion in Hakkinen, supra, this language required two things to be done:

1. Apportionment by the trial court of the expenses in the litigation which resulted in the settlement of Hakkinen’s claim against the third-party tortfeasor between Hakkinen and Employers Mutual Liability Insurance Company.

2. After this determination, the Bureau of Workmen’s Compensation was required to credit Employers Mutual’s liability for workmen’s compensation benefits with a corrected amount which reflected the apportionment of those expenses.

The present appeal is before us because the trial court did more than it was required to do under Hakkinen, supra. In addition to apportioning $2,665.06 of the expenses to Employers Mutual, the trial court fixed the amount of credit to which Employers Mutual was entitled against workmen’s compensation benefits paid and to be paid to Hakkinen. This was error. The credit to which Employers Mutual was entitled was for the Bureau of Workmen’s Compensation to determine.

The trial court is reversed except as to its determination that Employers Mutual’s share of expenses in the third-party litigation was $2,665.06. That determination is affirmed and the cause is remanded to the Workmen’s Compensation Bureau for correction of the credit heretofore allowed Employers Mutual on its liability for payment of workmen’s compensation benefits to Hakkinen. No costs are allowed.

Allen, P. J., concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI