Lofton v. Autozone, Inc., 061306 MIWC, 2006-218
Case Date | June 13, 2006 |
Court | Michigan |
"[W]e remand for a Sington analysis utilizing Stokes as a too) for such analysis."ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION In order to establish a work-related disability, Plaintiff must demonstrate that he has a limitation of his maximum wage-earning capacity in work suitable to his qualifications and training. MCL 418.301(4); MSA 17.237(301 )(4); Sington v Chrysler Com. 467 Mich. 144, 154; 648 N.W.2d 624 (2002). An inability to return to the same or similar work is not enough to establish disability; the claimant is not disabled if the physical limitation does not affect the ability to earn maximum wages in work in which the claimant is qualified and trained. Id, p 156, citing Rea v Regency Olds/Mazda/Volvo. 450 Mich. 1201; 536 N.W.2d 542 (1995). In determining the claimant's maximum wage earning capacity, the factors that the magistrate is to consider include: (1) the particular work that the employee is both trained and qualified to perform; (2) whether there continues to be a substantial job market for such work, and (3) the wages typically earned for such employment in comparison to the employee's wages on the date of injury. Id, p 157. Plaintiff carries the burden of proof by the preponderance of the evidence standard. Aquilina v General Motors Corporation, 403 Mich. 206; 267 N.W.2d 923 (1978). Once the...
To continue reading
Request your trial