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

Mich. Comp. Laws § 418.852 (2026)

Liability of carrier or fund; determination; reimbursement of carrier or fund.

✓ 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


418.852 Liability of carrier or fund; determination; reimbursement of carrier or fund.

Sec. 852.

    (1) The liability of a carrier or fund regarding a claim under this act shall be determined by the hearing referee or worker's compensation magistrate, as applicable, at the time of the award of benefits.

    (2) If a carrier or fund originally determined to be liable pursuant to subsection (1) is subsequently determined to not be liable or not to the same extent as originally determined, that carrier or fund shall be reimbursed by the liable party or parties with interest at 12% per annum.

History: Add. 1985, Act 103, Imd. Eff. July 30, 1985

Compiler's Notes:

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

PopularName Notes:

Act 317
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1990–2007 · leading case: Auto-Owners Ins. v. Amoco Prod. Co., 658 N.W.2d 460 (Mich. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Auto-Owners Ins. v. Amoco Prod. Co., 658 N.W.2d 460 (Mich. 2003). · cites it 3× “The Court of Appeals found no error in the magistrate’s award and noted that plaintiff was not entitled to twelve percent interest pursuant to MCL 418.852. The Court found § 852, which provides as follows, to be inapplicable because it does not, by its own terms, apply under…”
Chase v. Terra Nova Indus., 728 N.W.2d 895 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 5× “According to appellants, because they were not involved in these proceedings at the time the initial award of benefits was granted, consideration of the issue was barred by MCL 418.852(1), as well as the doctrine of laches.”
Kihrotris v. Ford Motor Co., 454 N.W.2d 218 (Mich. Ct. App. 1990). “237(852X2), which provides: If a carrier or fund originally determined to be liable pursuant to subsection (1) is subsequently determined to not be liable or not to the same extent as originally determined, that carrier or fund shall be reimbursed by the liable party or parties…”
Auto-Owners Ins. v. Amoco Prod. Co., 628 N.W.2d 51 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “Next, we address plaintiff’s cursory request for twelve percent interest under MCL 418.852(2). The magistrate awarded plaintiff ten percent interest under MCL 418.”
Stein v. Braun Eng'g, 626 N.W.2d 907 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “Moreover, allowing the issue to be raised for the first time on appeal would contravene MCL 418.852(1), which specifically provides that the determination of liability is to be made by the magistrate at the time of the award of benefits.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 418.852(1) — 3 cases
Auto-Owners Ins. v. Amoco Prod. Co., 658 N.W.2d 460 (Mich. 2003). “The Court of Appeals found no error in the magistrate’s award and noted that plaintiff was not entitled to twelve percent interest pursuant to MCL 418.852. The Court found § 852, which provides as follows, to be inapplicable because it does not, by its own terms, apply under…”
Chase v. Terra Nova Indus., 728 N.W.2d 895 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007). “According to appellants, because they were not involved in these proceedings at the time the initial award of benefits was granted, consideration of the issue was barred by MCL 418.852(1), as well as the doctrine of laches.”
Stein v. Braun Eng'g, 626 N.W.2d 907 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). “Moreover, allowing the issue to be raised for the first time on appeal would contravene MCL 418.852(1), which specifically provides that the determination of liability is to be made by the magistrate at the time of the award of benefits.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 418.852(2) — 4 cases
Auto-Owners Ins. v. Amoco Prod. Co., 658 N.W.2d 460 (Mich. 2003). “The Court of Appeals found no error in the magistrate’s award and noted that plaintiff was not entitled to twelve percent interest pursuant to MCL 418.852. The Court found § 852, which provides as follows, to be inapplicable because it does not, by its own terms, apply under…”
Kihrotris v. Ford Motor Co., 454 N.W.2d 218 (Mich. Ct. App. 1990). “237(852X2), which provides: If a carrier or fund originally determined to be liable pursuant to subsection (1) is subsequently determined to not be liable or not to the same extent as originally determined, that carrier or fund shall be reimbursed by the liable party or parties…”
Auto-Owners Ins. v. Amoco Prod. Co., 628 N.W.2d 51 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). “Next, we address plaintiff’s cursory request for twelve percent interest under MCL 418.852(2). The magistrate awarded plaintiff ten percent interest under MCL 418.”
Stein v. Braun Eng'g, 626 N.W.2d 907 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). “Moreover, allowing the issue to be raised for the first time on appeal would contravene MCL 418.852(1), which specifically provides that the determination of liability is to be made by the magistrate at the time of the award of benefits.”
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.