Luyk v. Hertel

Decision Date04 June 1928
Docket NumberNo. 133.,133.
Citation242 Mich. 445,219 N.W. 721
PartiesLUYK et al. v. HERTEL et al.
CourtMichigan Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Appeal from Circuit Court, Kent County, in Chancery; Willis B. Perkins, Judge.

Suit by Meindirina Luyk and others against John W. Herted and others to set aside findings of Board of Labor and Industry under the Workmen's Compensation Law. Decree dismissing bill, and plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.

Argued before the Entire Bench, except McDONALD, J.Cornelius Hoffius and Dorr Kuizema, both of Grand Rapids, for appellants.

Kerr, Lacey & Scroggie, of Detroit (Dunham & Cholette, of Grand Rapids, of Counsel), for appellees.

WIEST, J.

The bill herein was filed to seaside findings of the Board of Labor and Industry, under the Workmen's Compensation Law, on the sole ground of newly discovered evidence. Upon motion of defendants the bill was dismissed for want of jurisdiction in the court of equity. Plaintiffs appealed.

For the purposes of decision we accept as true every well-pleaded averment of fact stated in the bill. No fraud is alleged. The question is whether findings of fact, made by the board acting within its powers, can be set aside by the court of equity upon the ground of newly discovered evidence.

C. L. 1915, § 5465, provides:

‘The findings of fact made by said Industrial Accident Board [now Board of Labor and Industry] acting within its powers, shall, in the absence of fraud, be conclusive, but the Supreme Court shall have power to review questions of law involved in any final decision or determination of said Industrial Accident Board.’

The alleged newly discovered evidence, of course, relates to the findings of fact made by the board. The board acted within its power, and the findings, upon the evidence submitted, are not questioned. Plaintiffs' rights and remedies and defendants' liability, if any, are wholly under the Workmen's Compensation Law. Plaintiffs failed to present evidence justifying an award to them. No review by certiorari was sought.

The Workmen's Compensation Law is a departure, by statute, from the common law, and its procedure provisions speak all intended upon the subject. Rights, remedies, and procedure thereunder are such, and such only, as the statute provides. If the statute is short of what it should contain in order to prevent injustice, the defects must be cured by future legislation and not by judicial pronouncement. The statute makes the findings of fact by the board conclusive in the absence of fraud, and the exception states a limitation to the exclusion of all other considerations. The board has no power to grant a rehearing of its determinations. Martilla v. Quincy Mining Co., 221 Mich. 525, 191 N. W. 193, 30 A. L. R. 1249, and cases there cited. The court of equity may relieve against actual fraud by setting aside an award. Smith v. Port Huron Gas & Electric Co., 217 Mich. 519, 187 N. W. 292;Smith v. Port Huron Gas & Electric Co., 222 Mich. 350, 192 N. W. 588;American Life Ins. Co. v. Balmer, 238 Mich. 580, 214 N. W. 208. But the court of equity may not set aside the award or findings of fact of the Board of Labor and Industry by reason of newly discovered evidence. The limitation in the statute, to instances of fraud, is too plain to admit of such consideration. It is a general rule:

‘That the affirmative description of the cases in which the jurisdiction may be exercised implies a negative on the exercise of such...

To continue reading

Request your trial
33 cases
  • Autio v. Proksch Const. Co.
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • June 1, 1965
    ...to prevent injustice, the defects must be cured by future legislation and not by judicial pronouncement. * * * ' Luyk v. Hertel (1928), 242 Mich. 445, 447, 219 N.W. 721, 722. The Act provides for limitational periods within which claims must be brought and also provides that the running of ......
  • Stokes v. Chrysler LLC
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • June 12, 2008
    ...only as the statute provides.'" Paschke v. Retool Industries, 445 Mich. 502, 511, 519 N.W.2d 441 (1994), quoting Luyk v. Hertel, 242 Mich. 445, 447, 219 N.W. 721 (1928) (emphasis in Paschke). Under the WDCA, a claimant who proves that he suffered a "disability" is entitled to benefits. MCL ......
  • Smith v. City Comm'n of City of Grand Rapids
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • September 1, 1937
    ...150 Mich. 452, 114 N.W. 239. When the language of a statute is plain and unambiguous, there is no room for construction, Luyk v. Hertel, 242 Mich. 445, 219 N.W. 721;Detroit v. Township of Bedford, 253 Mich. 453, 235 N.W. 217; but the statute must be given effect according to its plain meani......
  • Paschke v. Retool Industries
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • July 5, 1994
    ...in order to prevent injustice, the defects must be cured by future legislation and not by judicial pronouncement. [Luyk v Hertel, 242 Mich 445, 447; 219 NW 721 (1928). (Emphasis added.) Where the statutory language is clear, the courts should neither add nor detract from its provisions. Nev......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT