WORKER'S DISABILITY COMPENSATION ACT OF 1969
Act 317 of 1969
418.925 Procedure and practice applicable in personal injury proceedings; notice to fund; payments by carrier on behalf of fund; reimbursement; direct payments by fund.
Sec. 925.
(1) When a vocationally disabled person receives a personal injury, the procedure and practice provided in this act applies to all proceedings under this chapter, except where specifically otherwise provided herein. Not less than 90 nor more than 150 days before the expiration of 52 weeks after the date of injury, the carrier shall notify the fund whether it is likely that compensation may be payable beyond a period of 52 weeks after the date of injury. The fund, thereafter, may review, at reasonable times, such information as the carrier has regarding the accident, and the nature and extent of the injury and disability.
(2) If the fund does not notify the carrier of its intent to dispute the payment of compensation, the carrier shall continue to make payments on behalf of the fund, and shall be reimbursed by the fund for all compensation paid and pertaining to the period beyond 52 weeks after the date of injury. However at any time subsequent to 52 weeks after the date of injury, the fund may notify the carrier of a dispute as to the payment of compensation. The liability of the fund to reimburse the carrier shall be suspended 30 days thereafter until such controversy is determined.
(3) The obligation imposed by this section on a carrier to make payments on behalf of the fund does not impose an independent liability on the carrier. After a carrier has established the right to reimbursement, payment shall be made promptly on a proper showing every 6 months. If a carrier does not make the payments on behalf of the fund, the fund may make the payments directly to the persons entitled to such payments.
History: Add. 1971, Act 183, Eff. July 1, 1972 ;-- Am. 1985, Act 103, Imd. Eff. July 30, 1985 ;-- Am. 1998, Act 74, Imd. Eff. May 4, 1998
Compiler's Notes:
For legislative intent as to severability, see Compiler's note to MCL 418.213.
PopularName Notes:
Act 317
Notes of Decisions
Bailey v. Oakwood Hosp. & Med. Ctr., 698 N.W.2d 374 (Mich. 2005).
· cites it 45× “§ 418.925[1]) further provides: When a vocationally disabled person receives a personal injury, the procedure and practice provided in this act applies to all proceedings under this chapter, except where specifically otherwise provided herein.”
Valencic v. Tpm, Inc, 639 N.W.2d 846 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 11× “However, the precise issue presented here is whether the certification form that was submitted in the instant case was sufficient to satisfy that mandatory requirement.”
Bailey v. Oakwood Hosp. & Med. Ctr., 674 N.W.2d 160 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 10× “The Fund moved to dismiss defendant's petition for failure to comply with the notice provisions set by MCL 418.925. The magistrate found that defendant had failed to timely notify the Fund *162 of plaintiff's claims as required by subsections 925(1) and 931(1) of the worker's…”
Robinson v. Gen. Motors Corp., 619 N.W.2d 411 (Mich. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 2× “Defendant General Motors Corporation (GM) appeals by leave granted from an order of the Worker’s Compensation Appellate Commission (wcac) dismissing the Second Injury Fund (the fund) as a party in this action because of GM’s failure to comply with the notice provision of MCL…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 418.925(1) — 4 cases
Bailey v. Oakwood Hosp. & Med. Ctr., 698 N.W.2d 374 (Mich. 2005).
“§ 418.925[1]) further provides: When a vocationally disabled person receives a personal injury, the procedure and practice provided in this act applies to all proceedings under this chapter, except where specifically otherwise provided herein.”
Valencic v. Tpm, Inc, 639 N.W.2d 846 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002).
“However, the precise issue presented here is whether the certification form that was submitted in the instant case was sufficient to satisfy that mandatory requirement.”
Bailey v. Oakwood Hosp. & Med. Ctr., 674 N.W.2d 160 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004).
“The Fund moved to dismiss defendant's petition for failure to comply with the notice provisions set by MCL 418.925. The magistrate found that defendant had failed to timely notify the Fund *162 of plaintiff's claims as required by subsections 925(1) and 931(1) of the worker's…”
Robinson v. Gen. Motors Corp., 619 N.W.2d 411 (Mich. Ct. App. 2000).
“Defendant General Motors Corporation (GM) appeals by leave granted from an order of the Worker’s Compensation Appellate Commission (wcac) dismissing the Second Injury Fund (the fund) as a party in this action because of GM’s failure to comply with the notice provision of MCL…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 418.925(2) — 1 case
Bailey v. Oakwood Hosp. & Med. Ctr., 698 N.W.2d 374 (Mich. 2005).
“§ 418.925[1]) further provides: When a vocationally disabled person receives a personal injury, the procedure and practice provided in this act applies to all proceedings under this chapter, except where specifically otherwise provided herein.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 418.925(3) — 1 case
Bailey v. Oakwood Hosp. & Med. Ctr., 698 N.W.2d 374 (Mich. 2005).
“§ 418.925[1]) further provides: When a vocationally disabled person receives a personal injury, the procedure and practice provided in this act applies to all proceedings under this chapter, except where specifically otherwise provided herein.”
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.