Dann v. Sorensen-Gross Const. Co., SORENSEN-GROSS

• Decision Date: 24 February 1972
• Docket Number: Docket No. 11129,No. 2,SORENSEN-GROSS,2
• Parties: Robert D. DANN et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v.CONSTRUCTION CO., and Michigan Employment Security Commission, Defendants-Appellees
• Court: Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US

Page 785

196 N.W.2d 785

38 Mich.App. 608

Robert D. DANN et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. SORENSEN-GROSS CONSTRUCTION CO., and Michigan Employment Security Commission, Defendants-Appellees.

Docket No. 11129.

Court of Appeals of Michigan, Division No. 2.

Feb. 24, 1972.

Released for Publication May 4, 1972.

C. Robert Beltz, Flint, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Robert A. Derengoski, Sol. Gen., Felix E. League, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendants-appellees.

Before LESINSKI, C.J., and McGREGOR and QUINN, JJ.

QUINN, Judge.

Plaintiffs appeal from the judgment of the circuit court which affirmed the referee and appeal board of the Employment Security Commission in their determination that plaintiffs were disqualified for unemployment compensation benefits under M.C.L.A. § 421.29(8); M.S.A. § 17.531(8).

The referee found that plaintiffs were employees of defendant company and worked as laborers at the Fenton high school job site. A labor dispute arose between the carpenter and operating engineer unions and defendant company which resulted in a strike by those unions. Plaintiffs were not members of those unions. The referee further found:

'The referee finds that the establishment involved here is the Sorensen-Gross company, that the labor disputes of the carpenters, operating engineers, and cement finishers was in active progress in that establishment on the dates the claimants were laid off, that those striking trades were a unit or group of workers in that establishment, and that claimants were laid off as a result of their labor disputes. Accordingly, the act requires claimants' disqualification for benefits even though he and his trade were not engaged in a labor dispute of their own.'

(The record indicates that the referee made similar findings with respect to each claimant.) The Appeal Board of the Employment Security Commission affirmed these findings.

Reviewing courts are bound by findings of the administrative agency if the findings are supported by competent, material, and substantial evidence on the whole record, Const.1963, art. 6, § 28. The same test is provided by statute in court review of proceedings before the Appeal Board of the Employment Security Commission, M.C.L.A. § 421.38; M.S.A. § 17.540.

In its opinion affirming the referee and appeal board, the reviewing trial court stated the issue as: 'Whether the findings of an administrative tribunal may be so disturbed by an appellate court where the record contains evidence, though conflicting, which supports a determination?'

In its opinion, the...