Court Opinion

ID: 9855185
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 06:20:46.386095+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:23:43.170217
License: Public Domain

*449Dethmers, J.
{dissenting). For reasons set forth in my opinion in Schoppe v. Calumet & Hecla, Inc., 382 Mich 450, it is my view that the limitations of section 4  referred to in the opinion of Mr. Justice T. G-. Kavanagh are applicable and that there is, therefore, no occasion for remand for the taking of proofs on the subject of whether the disease from which plaintiff suffers, causing his disability, is so common and widespread as to present a threat to the industry comparable to silicosis, phthisis, and pneumoconiosis. The statute speaks in plain language of “dust disease”. Plaintiff suffers from dust disease. Whether it is widespread in the industry or not is immaterial.
The order of the appeal board should be affirmed and that of the Court of Appeals reversed.
Kelly and Black, JJ., concurred with Dethmers, J.