Case Name: DeTROYER v. ERNST KERN CO.
Court: Michigan Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1937-12-29
Citations: 282 Mich. 689
Docket Number: Docket No. 116, Calendar No. 39,166
Parties: DeTROYER v. ERNST KERN CO.
Judges: Fead, C. J., and North, Wiest, Bhshnell,, Sharpe, Potter, and Chandler, JJ., concurred.
Reporter: Michigan Reports
Volume: 282
Pages: 689–695

Head Matter:
DeTROYER v. ERNST KERN CO.
1. Workmen’s Compensation — Order Suspending Payment — Subsequent Disability.
Order which approved agreement suspending payment of compensation and stipulating for right of plaintiff to petition department for further compensation for disability thereafter developing held, void as without statutory authority, the case being controlled by Miller v. City Ice & Fuel Co., 279 Mich. 92.
On Rehearing.
2. Same — All Words in Settlement Agreement Given Effect.
All of the words in a settlement agreement as to compensation between employer and employee, form for which was supplied by, and agreement as made approved by, the department of labor and industry are to be given effect.
3. Same — Agreement Suspending Payment of Compensation. •
Settlement agreement between employer and employee, signed upon employee’s return to employment in an attempt to rehabilitate himself, suspending payment of compensation and not terminating its payments held, not to violate either the spirit or letter of the workmen’s compensation law nor to preclude recovery of further compensation upon the continuance or reappearance of disability though not greater than existed at time agreement was entered into to suspend payments.
Appeal from Department of Labor and Industry.
Submitted April 21, 1937.
(Docket No. 116, Calendar No. 39,166.)
Decided June 7, 1937.
Submitted on rehearing October 5, 1937.
Decided December 29, 1937.
Bea DeTroyer presented ber claim for compensation against Ernst Kern Company, employer, and St. Paul Mercury Indemnity Company, insurer, for injuries suffered in defendant’s employ. Award to plaintiff. Defendants appeal.
Affirmed.
Dann & Atlas, for plaintiff.
Kerr, Lacey S Scroggie, for defendants.

Opinion:
Btitzel, J.
Plaintiff, after receiving compensation for about four weeks under an approved agreement, signed a document on the form supplied by the department entitled, "supplemental agreement suspending further payment of compensation," in which there is contained a stipulation that if further disability from the injuries should thereafter develop, the agreement would not bar plaintiff's right to petition the department for such further and added compensation as she may be entitled to. Shortly after the agreement was approved by the department of labor and industry, plaintiff filed a petition asking for further compensation, alleging that she was still disabled and under the care of a doctor. Testimony was taken and compensation allowed. Defendants on appeal complain that plaintiff was not entitled to further compensation without alleging and proving a subsequent change in her physical condition showing a greater disability than existed at the time the agreement to suspend compensation was entered into.
The same question was presented in Miller v. City Ice & Fuel Co., 279 Mich. 592, wherein the majority opinion of the court held against defendants' contentions.
The award is affirmed, with costs to plaintiff.
Fead, C. J., and North, Wiest, Bhshnell,, Sharpe, Potter, and Chandler, JJ., concurred.