WORKER'S DISABILITY COMPENSATION ACT OF 1969
Act 317 of 1969
418.861b Vexatious claim or proceedings; disciplinary action.
Sec. 861b.
The commission, upon its own motion, or the motion of any party, may dismiss a claim for review, assess costs, or take other disciplinary action when it has been determined that the claim or any of the proceedings with regard to the claim was vexatious by reason of either of the following:
(a) That the claim was taken for purposes of hindrance or delay or without any reasonable basis for belief that there was meritorious issue to be determined on appeal.
(b) That any pleading, motion, argument, petition, brief, document, or appendix filed in the cause or any testimony presented in the cause was grossly lacking in the requirements of propriety or grossly disregarded the requirements of a fair presentation of the issues.
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
Brown v. Cassens Transp. Co., 743 F. Supp. 2d 651 (E.D. Mich. 2010).
· cites it 2× “” Also, under section 418.861b, the WCAC may dismiss a claim submitted for review, and assess costs and take other disciplinary action if it determines that the claim is proceeding vexatiously or was taken with *663 out a reasonable basis for believing that the claim had merit.”
Rzanca v. Ldi, Inc, 531 N.W.2d 836 (Mich. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 2× “Concluding that defendants failed to properly raise an issue on appeal and citing MCL 418.861b; MSA 17.237(861b), the wcac granted plaintiff thirty days to provide a list of reasonable costs, including attorney fees.”
Rodney Collins v. Detroit Radiator Corp. (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 17× “Notably, in doing so, the MCAC also concluded that defendants’ motion for costs and other disciplinary action under MCL 418.861b for vexatious claims was moot.”
Rodney Collins v. Detroit Radiator Corp. (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 17× “Notably, in doing so, the MCAC also concluded that defendants’ motion for costs and other disciplinary action under MCL 418.861b for vexatious claims was moot.”
McIntosh v. Chrysler Corp., 538 N.W.2d 428 (Mich. Ct. App. 1995).
“These companion cases concern the proper application of the "vexatious appeal” provisions of MCL 418.861b; MSA 17.237(861b). We conclude that the Worker’s Compensation Appellate Commission (wcac) applied an erroneous standard and reverse.”
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.