Ingle v. Armour & Co

250 N.W. 312, 264 Mich. 569, 1933 Mich. LEXIS 1063
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 2, 1933
DocketDocket No. 80, Calendar No. 36,865.
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 250 N.W. 312 (Ingle v. Armour & Co) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ingle v. Armour & Co, 250 N.W. 312, 264 Mich. 569, 1933 Mich. LEXIS 1063 (Mich. 1933).

Opinion

Wiest, J.

October 28, 1927, plaintiff, while in the employ of defendant Armour & Company, received a compensable injury, and, by agreement, he was to be paid $18 per week during total disability. He was paid $579', and, June 9, 1928, resumed his employment and was paid his previous wage of $30, *570 per week until September 21, 1929, when he voluntarily quit. June 27, 1928, plaintiff executed a final settlement receipt which was filed with the department but no approval thereof sought or had at that time. In November, 1931, plaintiff filed with the department of labor and industry a petition for further compensation, and, upon hearing before a deputy commissioner, it was, on January 4, 1932, determined and adjudged that he was not entitled to further compensation. No appeal was taken.

In February, 1932, plaintiff procured from the secretary of the department copies of thfe record, inclusive of the holding: “There is no compensation due to the plaintiff on the'date hereof.”

March 12, 1932, plaintiff took judgment in the circuit „ court on the agreement for compensation, for the sum of $3,381, making no deduction for the sum paid him for work and labor from June 9,1928, to September 1, 1929. Upon learning of the judgment defendants moved to set it aside, and, on July 1, 1932, the court set the judgment aside. Plaintiff reviews by appeal.

The facts as stated commanded vacation of the judgment. See Oliver Iron Mining Co. v. Pneff, 262 Mich. 116.

Affirmed, with costs to defendants.

McDonald, C. J., and Potter, Sharpe, North, Fead, and Butzel, JJ., concurred. Clark, J., took no part in this decision.

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

Related

Holmes v. State Industrial Accident Commission
363 P.2d 563 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1961)
Hughson v. City of Kalamazoo
260 N.W. 111 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1935)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
250 N.W. 312, 264 Mich. 569, 1933 Mich. LEXIS 1063, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ingle-v-armour-co-mich-1933.