Court Opinion

ID: 9672817
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 04:00:47.398035+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:26:22.765501
License: Public Domain

M. F. Cavanagh, P.J.
We adopt the facts as stated by our brother Hoehn and agree with his affirmance of plaintiff’s right to compensation. However, we do not conclude that the record in this case requires a reversal as to defendant’s right to set off amounts voluntarily paid. MCL 418.811; MSA 17.237(811) was not ambiguous prior to its amendment. We are persuaded by the Court’s reasoning in Henry v Ford Motor Co, 291 Mich 535; 289 NW 244 (1939), and affirm the decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board as this record discloses that defendant has not proven that the wage continuation program which benefited plaintiff was either wages within the meaning of MCL 418.371; MSA 17.237(371) or compensation paid pursuant to the Worker’s Disability Compensation Act.
Affirmed.
D. C. Riley, J., concurred.