Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 418 / Act 317 of 1969
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 418.274 (2026)

Michigan compensation appellate commission; power and authority of commission; rules on administrative appellate procedures; assignment and reassignment of matters; decisions; review and decision by entire commission; writing and publication of opinions; office space.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

WORKER'S DISABILITY COMPENSATION ACT OF 1969


Act 317 of 1969


418.274 Michigan compensation appellate commission; power and authority of commission; rules on administrative appellate procedures; assignment and reassignment of matters; decisions; review and decision by entire commission; writing and publication of opinions; office space.

Sec. 274.

    (1) The Michigan compensation appellate commission created in Executive Reorganization Order No. 2011-6, MCL 445.2032, and housed within the Michigan administrative hearing system, may handle, process, and decide appeals from orders of the director and hearing referees and the orders and opinions of the worker's compensation magistrates as provided for under this act. The commission may promulgate rules on administrative appellate procedure for purposes under this act.

    (2) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (3), matters that are to be reviewed by the commission shall be randomly assigned to a panel of 3 members of the commission for disposition. The chairperson of the commission may reassign a matter in order to ensure timely review and decision of that matter. The decision reached by a majority of the assigned 3 members of a panel shall be the final decision of the commission.

    (3) Any matter that is to be reviewed by the commission that may establish a precedent with regard to worker's compensation in this state as determined by the chairperson, or any matter that 2 or more members of the commission request be reviewed by the entire commission, shall be reviewed and decided by the entire commission.

    (4) Opinions of the commission shall be in writing. The commission shall provide for the publication of those opinions.

    (5) The department of licensing and regulatory affairs shall provide suitable office space for the commission and employees of the commission.

History: Add. 1985, Act 103, Imd. Eff. July 30, 1985 ;-- Am. 1994, Act 271, Imd. Eff. July 11, 1994 ;-- Am. 2011, Act 266, Imd. Eff. Dec. 19, 2011

Compiler's Notes:

    For legislative intent as to severability, see Compiler's note to MCL 418.213.

    For abolishment of the qualifications advisory committee and establishment of the new qualifications advisory committee within the worker's compensation agency, see E.R.O. No. 2003-1, compiled at MCL 445.2011.

    Enacting section 2 of Act 266 of 2011 provides:

    "Enacting section 2. This amendatory act applies to injuries incurred on or after its effective date."

    For the transfer of powers and duties from the department of licensing and regulatory affairs to the department of labor and economic opportunity, see E.R.O. No. 2019-3, compiled at MCL 125.1998.

    For the abolishment of the Michigan compensation appellate commission and establishment of the new workers' disability compensation appeals commission within the workers' disability compensation agency in the department of labor and economic opportunity and the transfer of certain powers and duties of the Michigan compensation appellate commission to the workers' disability compensation appeals commission, see E.R.O. No. 2019-3, compiled at MCL 125.1998.

PopularName Notes:

Act 317
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1986–2023 · leading case: Civil Serv. Comm'n v. Dep't of Labor, 384 N.W.2d 728 (Mich. 1986).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Civil Serv. Comm'n v. Dep't of Labor, 384 N.W.2d 728 (Mich. 1986). · cites it 14× “237(251), MCL 418.274; MSA 17.237(274). [8] MCL 418.”
Farrington v. Total Petroleum, Inc., 501 N.W.2d 76 (Mich. 1993). · cites it 2× “859a(1); MSA 17.237(859a)(1), MCL 418.861a(1); MSA 17.”
Williams v. Hofley Mfg. Co., 424 N.W.2d 278 (Mich. 1988). · cites it 2× “The appellate commissioners are not appointed according to interest designation, MCL 418.274; MSA 17.237(274), and any interim appointee to the appeal board must be a designated representative of the general public.”
Aaron v. Michigan Boiler & Eng'g, 462 N.W.2d 821 (Mich. Ct. App. 1990). “These two workers’ compensation cases were consolidated on appeal, because they have in common issues involving the proper standard of review of magistrates’ opinions by the Workers’ Compensation Appellate Commission.”
Farrington v. Total Petroleum, Inc, 472 N.W.2d 60 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991). “While the wcac dissent argues that it would be unreasonable to construe the October 1, 1986, date as referring to the date on which a claim for review was filed, because no magistrate or commissioner had in fact been appointed as of October 1, 1986, this situation does not…”
Lopez v. Union Carbide Corp., 83 F. Supp. 2d 880 (E.D. Mich. 2000). “§ 418.274(8). If this Court were to deny Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Guadalupe and Eva Lopez’s Claims Only and were to either grant summary judgment on the basis that Defendant Union Carbide was not the employer — a question that the Bureau did not need to reach —…”
Marshall v. D.J. Jacobetti Vets. Facility, 517 N.W.2d 855 (Mich. Ct. App. 1994). “Section 861a(l) is not a mandate to hear all appeals, with or without briefs, but, in conjunction with § 859a to which it specifically refers, is an allocation of jurisdiction between the former appeal board and the current appellate commission.”
Holden v. Ford Motor Co., 484 N.W.2d 227 (Mich. 1992). “237[209]) provided for a gubernatorially appointed six-member Qualifications Advisory Committee to, among other things, recommend for appointment to the Governor the members of the Board of Magistrates and the Workers’ Compensation Appellate Commission.”
Findley v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 797 N.W.2d 175 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010). “MCL 418.274(8) provides in pertinent part that “[t]he decision reached by a majority of the assigned 3 members of a panel shall be the final decision of the commission.”
Iesha Fisher v. Kalamazoo Reg'l Psychiatric Hosp. (Mich. Ct. App. 2019). “) With respect to worker’s disability compensation, the Legislature enacted the WDCA, within which it granted and defined the Commission’s limited authority to “handle, process, and decide appeals from orders of the director and hearing referees and the orders and opinions of…”
Agnes N Cramer v. Transitional Health Servs. of Wayne (Mich. 2023). “] 12 This is especially significant because en banc Commission decisions serve as binding precedent on other Commission panels under MCL 418.274(3) (“Any matter that is to be reviewed by the commission that may establish a precedent with regard to worker’s compensation in this…”
Torme C Findley v. Daimlerchrysler Corp. (Mich. 2011). “Plaintiff appealed and 2 the Court of Appeals, relying on MCL 418.274(8) and Aquilina v General Motors Corp, 403 Mich 206 (1978), vacated and remanded for issuance of a “true majority” decision.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 418.274(1) — 3 cases
Farrington v. Total Petroleum, Inc., 501 N.W.2d 76 (Mich. 1993). “859a(1); MSA 17.237(859a)(1), MCL 418.861a(1); MSA 17.”
Farrington v. Total Petroleum, Inc, 472 N.W.2d 60 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991). “While the wcac dissent argues that it would be unreasonable to construe the October 1, 1986, date as referring to the date on which a claim for review was filed, because no magistrate or commissioner had in fact been appointed as of October 1, 1986, this situation does not…”
Iesha Fisher v. Kalamazoo Reg'l Psychiatric Hosp. (Mich. Ct. App. 2019). “) With respect to worker’s disability compensation, the Legislature enacted the WDCA, within which it granted and defined the Commission’s limited authority to “handle, process, and decide appeals from orders of the director and hearing referees and the orders and opinions of…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 418.274(3) — 1 case
Agnes N Cramer v. Transitional Health Servs. of Wayne (Mich. 2023). “] 12 This is especially significant because en banc Commission decisions serve as binding precedent on other Commission panels under MCL 418.274(3) (“Any matter that is to be reviewed by the commission that may establish a precedent with regard to worker’s compensation in this…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 418.274(7) — 2 cases
Marshall v. D.J. Jacobetti Vets. Facility, 517 N.W.2d 855 (Mich. Ct. App. 1994). “Section 861a(l) is not a mandate to hear all appeals, with or without briefs, but, in conjunction with § 859a to which it specifically refers, is an allocation of jurisdiction between the former appeal board and the current appellate commission.”
Gretel v. Worker's Comp. Appellate Comm'n, 552 N.W.2d 532 (Mich. Ct. App. 1996).
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 418.274(8) — 3 cases
Lopez v. Union Carbide Corp., 83 F. Supp. 2d 880 (E.D. Mich. 2000). “§ 418.274(8). If this Court were to deny Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Guadalupe and Eva Lopez’s Claims Only and were to either grant summary judgment on the basis that Defendant Union Carbide was not the employer — a question that the Bureau did not need to reach —…”
Findley v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 797 N.W.2d 175 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010). “MCL 418.274(8) provides in pertinent part that “[t]he decision reached by a majority of the assigned 3 members of a panel shall be the final decision of the commission.”
Torme C Findley v. Daimlerchrysler Corp. (Mich. 2011). “Plaintiff appealed and 2 the Court of Appeals, relying on MCL 418.274(8) and Aquilina v General Motors Corp, 403 Mich 206 (1978), vacated and remanded for issuance of a “true majority” decision.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.