Court Opinion

ID: 9739124
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 20:09:13.630581+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:10.175906
License: Public Domain

Jansen, J.
(dissenting.) Plaintiff related numerous events that led to her disabling depression as diagnosed by two doctors. The events related by plaintiff did occur. The change in the law brought about by the 1980 amendment of MCL 418.301(2); MSA 17.237(301X2) and, MCL 418.401(2)(b); MSA 17.237(401)(2)(b) makes it clear that a mental disability must arise out of "actual events of employment, not unfounded perceptions thereof.” The actual events were undeniably established by plaintiff in this case. The statute does not say that the events must be extraordinary or something that must disturb a reasonable employee. Such a requirement would be a significant change from settled law. Zaremba v Chrysler Corp, 377 Mich 226, 231; 139 NW2d 745 (1966).
Plaintiff established actual events of employment. She also established causation through the testimony of two doctors. While a third doctor found plaintiff only suffered from a personality disorder that was unrelated to her employment, the wcab did not rely on that doctor’s testimony in reaching its disposition. The wcab seemed to agree that plaintiff was disabled.
Under these circumstances, plaintiff was entitled to benefits, providing her employment contributed to her disability in a significant manner as required by § 301(2). Because the wcab never reached the significant manner requirement, I would remand for a determination of the extent that employment contributed to plaintiffs disability.