Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 418.373 (2026)

Employee receiving nondisability pension or retirement benefits, including old-age benefits; presumption; other standards of disability superseded; medical benefits under MCL 418.315 not barred.

✓ 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

418.373 Employee receiving nondisability pension or retirement benefits, including old-age benefits; presumption; other standards of disability superseded; medical benefits under MCL 418.315 not barred.

Sec. 373.

(1) An employee who terminates active employment and is receiving nondisability pension or retirement benefits under either a private or governmental pension or retirement program, including old-age benefits under the social security act, 42 U.S.C. 301 to 1397f, that was paid by or on behalf of an employer from whom weekly benefits under this act are sought shall be presumed not to have a loss of earnings or earning capacity as the result of a compensable injury or disease under either this chapter or chapter 4. This presumption may be rebutted only by a preponderance of the evidence that the employee is unable, because of a work related disability, to perform work suitable to the employee's qualifications, including training or experience. This standard of disability supersedes other applicable standards used to determine disability under either this chapter or chapter 4.

(2) This section shall not be construed as a bar to an employee receiving medical benefits under section 315 upon the establishment of a causal relationship between the employee's work and the need for medical treatment.

History: Add. 1980, Act 357, Eff. Jan. 1, 1982

PopularName Notes:

Act 317

PopularName Notes:

Heart and Lung Act

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 23 cases, 1986–2011 · leading case: White v. Gen. Motors Corp., 429 N.W.2d 576 (Mich. 1988).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

White v. Gen. Motors Corp., 429 N.W.2d 576 (Mich. 1988). · cites it 10× “MCL 418.373; MSA 17.237(373), which provides: (1) An employee who terminates active employment and is receiving nondisability pension or retirement benefits under either a private or governmental pension or retirement program, including old-age benefits under the social security…”

Frasier v. Model Coverall Serv., Inc, 453 N.W.2d 301 (Mich. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 6× “On May 23, 1986, defendant stopped plaintiff’s compensation benefits, claiming plaintiff’s disability did not meet the criteria to overcome the presumption in MCL 418.373; MSA 17.237(373) that there is no loss of wage-earning capacity upon a claimant’s receipt of nondisability…”

Peck v. Gen. Motors Corp., 417 N.W.2d 547 (Mich. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 6× “In Peck v General Motors Corp, the plaintiff was granted leave to appeal from a determination by the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board that he did not meet the new burden in proving disability placed on him by MCL 418.373; MSA 17.237(373). In Pankow v General Motors Corp, the…”

Dow Chem. Co. v. Curtis, 430 N.W.2d 645 (Mich. 1988). · cites it 2× “[4] MCL 418.373; MSA 17.237(373) as amended by 1980 PA 357 , effective January 1, 1982.”

Brown v. Beckwith Evans Co., 480 N.W.2d 311 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “On appeal to the wcab, defendants argued (1) that plaintiff failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that his disability was causally related to his employment and (2) that he voluntarily left work within his ability to perform.”

Haske v. Transp. Leasing, Inc., Indiana, 566 N.W.2d 896 (Mich. 1997). “Moreover, the amendment of the retiree presumption, MCL 418.373; MSA 17.237(373), clearly demonstrates that the Legislature knew how to accomplish the result advocated by the dissent and did not apply it to nonretirees.”

Miles v. Russell Mem'l Hosp., 507 N.W.2d 784 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “By leave granted, the Second Injury Fund appeals a March 6, 1992, opinion and order of the Workers’ Compensation Appellate Commission, one member dissenting, reversing the decision of a magistrate and declaring that § 373 of the Workers Disability Compensation Act, MCL 418.373;…”

Wojciechowski v. Gen. Motors Corp., 390 N.W.2d 727 (Mich. Ct. App. 1986). “hi The next issue on appeal is whether, on remand, § 373 of the wdca, MCL 418.373; MSA 17.237(373), which creates a presumption of no loss of wage earning capacity upon a claimant’s receipt of non-disability retirement benefits, should be retroactively applied to this case,…”

Bowie v. Delta Airlines, Inc., 661 A.2d 1128 (Me. 1995). “See Mich.Comp.Laws Ann. § 418.373 (West 1994).”

Dezwaan v. Holland Motor Express, 473 N.W.2d 788 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991). “237(373), which reads as follows: An employee who terminates active employment and is receiving nondisability pension or retirement benefits under either a private or governmental pension or retirement program, including old-age benefits under the social security act, 42 U.”

Turrentine v. Gen. Motors Corp., 499 N.W.2d 411 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993). “Similarly, in Hurd v Ford Motor Co, 423 Mich 531 ; 377 NW2d 300 (1985) , the Supreme Court held that § 301(2), MCL 418.301[2]; MSA 17.”

Temple v. H J Heinz Co., 446 N.W.2d 869 (Mich. Ct. App. 1989). “The Court found that the amendment to § 373 affected substantive rights under the act by changing the standard of disability which an employee who retires and receives a nondisability pension must meet to receive workers’ compensation benefits.”

Show all 23 citing cases →

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 418.373(1) — 11 cases

White v. Gen. Motors Corp., 429 N.W.2d 576 (Mich. 1988). “MCL 418.373; MSA 17.237(373), which provides: (1) An employee who terminates active employment and is receiving nondisability pension or retirement benefits under either a private or governmental pension or retirement program, including old-age benefits under the social security…”

Frasier v. Model Coverall Serv., Inc, 453 N.W.2d 301 (Mich. Ct. App. 1990). “On May 23, 1986, defendant stopped plaintiff’s compensation benefits, claiming plaintiff’s disability did not meet the criteria to overcome the presumption in MCL 418.373; MSA 17.237(373) that there is no loss of wage-earning capacity upon a claimant’s receipt of nondisability…”

Brown v. Beckwith Evans Co., 480 N.W.2d 311 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991). “On appeal to the wcab, defendants argued (1) that plaintiff failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that his disability was causally related to his employment and (2) that he voluntarily left work within his ability to perform.”

Rea v. Regency Olds/Mazda/Volvo, 517 N.W.2d 251 (Mich. Ct. App. 1994).

McDonald v. Holland Motor Express, Inc, 506 N.W.2d 234 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993).

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 418.373(2) — 1 case

Peck v. Gen. Motors Corp., 417 N.W.2d 547 (Mich. Ct. App. 1987). “In Peck v General Motors Corp, the plaintiff was granted leave to appeal from a determination by the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board that he did not meet the new burden in proving disability placed on him by MCL 418.373; MSA 17.237(373). In Pankow v General Motors Corp, the…”

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.