Buzzn v. Mincey Cartage Co., Motion No. 180.
| Court | Supreme Court of Michigan |
| Writing for the Court | NORTH |
| Citation | 226 N.W. 836,248 Mich. 64 |
| Decision Date | 07 October 1929 |
| Docket Number | Motion No. 180. |
| Parties | BUZZN et al. v. MINCEY CARTAGE CO. et al. MUNCEY CARTAGE CO. et al. v. MERRIAM, Circuit Judge. |
248 Mich. 64
226 N.W. 836
BUZZN et al.
v.
MINCEY CARTAGE CO. et al.
MUNCEY CARTAGE CO. et al.
v.
MERRIAM, Circuit Judge.
Motion No. 180.
Supreme Court of Michigan.
Oct. 7, 1929.
Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Law by George Buzzn and another, opposed by Muncey Cartage Company, employer, and the Massachusetts Bonding & Insurance Company, insurance carrier. The Industrial Accident Board, now the Department of Labor and Industry, made an award, and the award was certified to the circuit court and judgment entered thereon by De Witt H. Merriam, Circuit Judge. The employer and insurance carrier moved to set aside the judgment, and the motion was denied, and they seek by mandamus to compel the judge named to reverse the order entered. Writ issued.
Argued before the Entire Bench.
[226 N.W. 837]
Howard Farrell, of Detroit, for appellants.
Sol. Blumrosen, of Detroit, for appellees.
NORTH, C. J.
In November, 1915, an award payable in 300 weekly installments was made to George Buzzn and Ganski Flor Buzzn by the Industrial Accident Board, now the Department of Labor and Industry. The regularity of the proceeding resulting in the award is not questioned. No payments were made on this award and nothing further done relative thereto until October 25, 1928, when, in accordance with the statute (Comp. Laws 1915, § 5466), the award was certified to the circuit court of Wayne county where the accident occurred and judgment entered thereon by the respondent. Upon being served with a copy of the judgment, the relators herein moved to set the judgment aside on the grounds that the claim or award for compensation was barred by the statute of limitations and that the plaintiffs were guilty of laches. This motion was denied by the respondent, and the relators seek by mandamus a reversal of the order entered.
If the statute of limitations is applicable to the award, the writ must issue. Respondent held it was inapplicable. It is settled law in this state that the person in whose favor the award is made may bring ‘suit upon the award as upon a common-law arbitration.’ Crane v. Leonard, etc., 214 Mich. 218, 183 N. W. 204, 18 A. L. R. 285. Our statute of limitations reads: ‘All actions in any of the courts of this state shall be commenced within six years next after the causes of action shall accrue, and not afterward’ (with certain exceptions here not material). Comp. Laws 1915, § 12323. Under its terms the last of the payments was due on this award more than six...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Trentadue v. Buckler Lawn Sprinkler, No. 128579.
...limitations were noted by this Court in Lothian v. Detroit:9 They encourage the prompt recovery of damages, Buzzn v. Muncey Cartage Co., 248 Mich. 64, 67, 226 N.W. 836 (1929); they penalize plaintiffs who have not been industrious in pursuing their claims, First National Bank of Ovid v. Ste......
-
Lothian v. City of Detroit, Docket No. 64875
...are grounded in a number of worthy policy considerations. They encourage the prompt recovery of damages, Buzzn v. Muncey Cartage Co., 248 Mich. 64, 67, 226 N.W. 836 (1929); they penalize plaintiffs who [414 Mich. 167] have not been industrious in pursuing their claims, First National Bank o......
-
Ward v. Rooney-Gandy, Docket No. 250174.
...are grounded in a number of worthy policy considerations. They encourage the prompt recovery of damages, Buzzn v. Muncey Cartage Co., 248 Mich. 64, 67, 226 N.W. 836 (1929); they penalize plaintiffs who have not been industrious in pursuing their claims, First National Bank of Ovid v. Steel,......
-
Eldridge v. Idaho State Penitentiary, 5982
...176 P. 314; Federal Rubber Co. v. Industrial Commission et al., 185 Wis. 299, 201 N.W. 261, 40 A. L. R. 491; Buzzn v. Muncey Cartage Co., 248 Mich. 64, 226 N.W. 836.) Thos. J. Jones, Jr., for Respondents. That the Workmen's Compensation Law is a statutory enactment cannot be resisted in vie......
-
Trentadue v. Buckler Lawn Sprinkler, 128579.
...limitations were noted by this Court in Lothian v. Detroit:9 They encourage the prompt recovery of damages, Buzzn v. Muncey Cartage Co., 248 Mich. 64, 67, 226 N.W. 836 (1929); they penalize plaintiffs who have not been industrious in pursuing their claims, First National Bank of Ovid v. Ste......
-
Lothian v. City of Detroit, Docket No. 64875
...are grounded in a number of worthy policy considerations. They encourage the prompt recovery of damages, Buzzn v. Muncey Cartage Co., 248 Mich. 64, 67, 226 N.W. 836 (1929); they penalize plaintiffs who [414 Mich. 167] have not been industrious in pursuing their claims, First National Bank o......
-
Eldridge v. Idaho State Penitentiary, 5982
...176 P. 314; Federal Rubber Co. v. Industrial Commission et al., 185 Wis. 299, 201 N.W. 261, 40 A. L. R. 491; Buzzn v. Muncey Cartage Co., 248 Mich. 64, 226 N.W. 836.) Thos. J. Jones, Jr., for Respondents. That the Workmen's Compensation Law is a statutory enactment cannot be resisted in vie......
-
Ward v. Rooney-Gandy, Docket No. 250174.
...are grounded in a number of worthy policy considerations. They encourage the prompt recovery of damages, Buzzn v. Muncey Cartage Co., 248 Mich. 64, 67, 226 N.W. 836 (1929); they penalize plaintiffs who have not been industrious in pursuing their claims, First National Bank of Ovid v. Steel,......