Roy Fruehauf, Inc. v. Employment Security Commission

Michigan Court of Appeals

Roy Fruehauf, Inc. v. Employment Security Commission

165 N.W.2d 491, 14 Mich. App. 262, 1968 Mich. App. LEXIS 892

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 25, 1968

DocketDocket No. 1,469

StatusPublished

This text of 165 N.W.2d 491 (Roy Fruehauf, Inc. v. Employment Security Commission) 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

Roy Fruehauf, Inc. v. Employment Security Commission, 165 N.W.2d 491, 14 Mich. App. 262, 1968 Mich. App. LEXIS 892 (Mich. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Michigan Employment Security Commission Appeal Board affirmed the finding and ruling of a referee that plaintiff was a successor-employer and was required to assume and pay the tax rate and liability of the employer it succeeded. Plaintiff requested rehearing and permission to enter further proof. Both requests were denied and [263]*263plaintiff appealed to circuit court. The latter affirmed the appeal board, and plaintiff again appeals.

A review of the record does not disclose that the order appealed from is contrary to law or that it is not supported by competent, material and substantial evidence. Const 1963, art 6, § 28; CLS 1961, §421.38 (Stat Ann 1968 Rev §17.540). Nor does it disclose that Michigan Employment Security Commission Appeal Board abused its discretion in denying rehearing and permission to enter further proof.

Affirmed.

McGregor, P. J., and Quinn and Letts, JJ., concurred.

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

Per Curiam.

Michigan Employment Security Commission Appeal Board affirmed the finding and ruling of a referee that plaintiff was a successor-employer and was required to assume and pay the tax rate and liability of the employer it succeeded. Plaintiff requested rehearing and permission to enter further proof. Both requests were denied and [263]*263plaintiff appealed to circuit court. The latter affirmed the appeal board, and plaintiff again appeals.

A review of the record does not disclose that the order appealed from is contrary to law or that it is not supported by competent, material and substantial evidence. Const 1963, art 6, § 28; CLS 1961, §421.38 (Stat Ann 1968 Rev §17.540). Nor does it disclose that Michigan Employment Security Commission Appeal Board abused its discretion in denying rehearing and permission to enter further proof.

Affirmed.

McGregor, P. J., and Quinn and Letts, JJ., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

165 N.W.2d 491, 14 Mich. App. 262, 1968 Mich. App. LEXIS 892, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roy-fruehauf-inc-v-employment-security-commission-michctapp-1968.