Shaw v. Lakeway Chemicals, Inc.

153 N.W.2d 653, 379 Mich. 601, 1967 Mich. LEXIS 104
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 7, 1967
DocketCalendar 6, Docket 51,500
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 153 N.W.2d 653 (Shaw v. Lakeway Chemicals, Inc.) 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
Shaw v. Lakeway Chemicals, Inc., 153 N.W.2d 653, 379 Mich. 601, 1967 Mich. LEXIS 104 (Mich. 1967).

Opinions

Brennan, J.

Plaintiff was paid unemployment compensation benefits of $45 per week for 14 weeks from September 7,1963, through December 14, 1963. The total amount was $630.

In February, 1964, plaintiff received a workmen’s compensation award of $45 per week, beginning as [603]*603of August 31,1962, aud embracing the same 14-week period for which plaintiff was paid unemployment compensation.

On February 17, 1964, the Michigan employment security commission issued a redetermination, by which it was ordered that plaintiff was not entitled to the unemployment benefits he had received, and which ordered plaintiff to make restitution thereof to the commission in accordance with section 62(c) of the employment security act. PA 1965, No 281, amending CL 1948, § 421.62(e) (Stat Ann 1965 Cum Supp § 17.566 [c]).

On February 18, 1964, an appeal was taken from this redetermination, and a hearing on this appeal was had before a referee on March 5, 1964.

On April 20, 1964, the referee filed and served his decision, holding as follows:

“The redetermination of the commission issued on February 17, 1964, is hereby modified. It is held that the claimant was not entitled to the benefits received for the period from September 8, 1963, through December 15, 1963, in the amount of $630 and is required to make restitution in that amount under section 62(a) of the act. It is further held that the referee is without jurisdiction to authorize the commission to reimburse the claimant for attorney fees expended.
“(s) Mortimer S. Snow,
Referee.”

The decision of the referee was affirmed by action of the appeal board on July 8, 1964.

Thereafter, appeals were taken to the circuit court and the Court of Appeals, and each in turn has affirmed the action of the referee and the appeal board.

In none of these proceedings has the plaintiff challenged the legality or constitutionality of the re-determination in toto. Plaintiff merely urged that attorney fees and expenses incurred in the work[604]*604men’s compensation proceedings should be deducted from any restitution of unemployment compensation benefits.

The courts below, the commission and the referee all applied section 27n of the Michigan employment security act

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

Related

Cronin v. Minster Press
224 N.W.2d 336 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1974)
Shaw v. Lakeway Chemicals, Inc.
153 N.W.2d 653 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1967)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
153 N.W.2d 653, 379 Mich. 601, 1967 Mich. LEXIS 104, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shaw-v-lakeway-chemicals-inc-mich-1967.