Noble v. Ford Motor Co., Docket Nos. 81419

• Decision Date: 16 October 1986
• Docket Number: Docket Nos. 81419,81655
• Citation: 394 N.W.2d 50,152 Mich.App. 622
• Court: Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US
• Parties: Mitchell NOBLE, Deceased, Anna Noble, Widow, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Dearborn Foundry, Defendant-Appellant, and Silicosis & Dust Disease Fund, Defendant. Mitchell NOBLE, Deceased, Anna Noble, Widow, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Dearborn Foundry, Defendant, and Silicosis & Dust Disease Fund, Defendant-Appellant.

Page 50

394 N.W.2d 50

152 Mich.App. 622

Mitchell NOBLE, Deceased, Anna Noble, Widow, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Dearborn Foundry, Defendant-Appellant, and Silicosis & Dust Disease Fund, Defendant.

Mitchell NOBLE, Deceased, Anna Noble, Widow, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Dearborn Foundry, Defendant, and Silicosis & Dust Disease Fund, Defendant-Appellant.

Docket Nos. 81419, 81655.

Court of Appeals of Michigan.

Submitted Jan. 22, 1986.

Decided June 17, 1986.

Released for Publication Oct. 16, 1986.

Blum & Rosenberg by David B. Rosenberg, Southfield, for plaintiff-appellee.

Conklin, Benham, McLeod, Ducey & Ottaway, P.C. by Martin L. Critchell, Detroit, of counsel to Richard G. Wood, for Ford Motor Co.

Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Louis J. Caruso, Sol. Gen., and Caleb B. Martin, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for Silicosis and Dust Disease Fund.

Before KELLY, P.J., and SHEPHERD and KNOBLOCK ^*, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

In this workers' compensation case defendants, Ford Motor Company and the Silicosis & Dust Disease Fund, appeal by leave granted from a Workers' Compensation Appeal Board order requiring defendants to pay plaintiff death benefits due to the death of her husband. We reverse the award of death benefits and hold, based on the factual findings of the appeal board, that plaintiff did not establish the necessary proximate causal connection between decedent's work-related injury and later death to entitle her to death benefits under M.C.L. Sec. 418.375; M.S.A. Sec. 17.237(375).

Plaintiff's decedent worked for defendant Ford Motor Company at its Dearborn foundry from 1928 until January 31, 1969. In July, 1970, the Bureau of Workers' Compensation determined that decedent had developed a compensable work-related injury, i.e., silicosis and emphysema. Decedent received compensation benefits from February 1, 1969, until the date of his death on October 14, 1974. The immediate cause of his death was carcinoma of the right lung with metastases to the brain and femur.

On May 20, 1977, plaintiff filed a petition for a hearing to determine her entitlement to worker's compensation death benefits. The petition alleged that decedent's exposure to atmospheric pollutants caused his silicosis which in turn caused his cancer and death. After a hearing the hearing officer ruled that plaintiff was not entitled to benefits because she had not shown that decedent's silicosis and emphysema were a cause or contributing cause of his death. A majority of the Workers' Compensation Appeal Board reversed that decision on October 19, 1984, ruling that although plaintiff had failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that decedent's carcinoma was caused by his exposure to atmospheric pollutants at work, plaintiff was nevertheless entitled to benefits because she had shown that decedent's death was related to his uncontested work-related disability, i.e., silicosis and emphysema.

Defendant Ford Motor Company first argues on appeal that the appeal board majority applied the wrong standard of causation in reaching its conclusion that the cancer was related to the silicosis. We agree. A dependent's right to compensation benefits, where there has been a death not immediately following the injury, is governed by Sec. 375 of the Worker's Disability Compensation Act, M.C.L. Sec. 418.375; M.S.A. Sec. 17.237(375), which provides in pertinent part:

"(1) The death of the injured employee prior to the expiration of the period within which he or she would receive such weekly payments shall be deemed to end the disability and all liability for the remainder of such payments which he or she would have received in case he or she had lived shall be terminated, but the employer shall thereupon be liable for the following death benefits in lieu of any further disability indemnity.

"(2) If the injury received by such employee was the proximate cause of his or her death, and the deceased employee leaves dependents, as hereinbefore specified, wholly or partially dependent on him or her for support, the death benefit shall be a sum sufficient, when added to the indemnity which at the time of death has been paid or becomes payable under the provisions of this act to the deceased employee, to make the total compensation for the injury and death exclusive of medical, surgical, hospital services, medicines, and rehabilitation services furnished as provided in sections 315 and 319, equal to the full amount which such dependents would have been entitled to receive under the provisions of section 321, in case the injury had resulted in immediate death. Such benefits shall be payable in the same manner as they would be payable under the provisions of section 321 had the injury resulted in immediate death." (Emphasis added.)

A plain reading of this provision clearly provides that where, as here, the employee dies after there has been an adjudication of workers' compensation liability and payment of those benefits, in order for the employee's dependents to continue to receive workers' compensation benefits, it must be shown that the work-related injury received by the employee was the proximate cause of his death.

The appeal board majority did not apply the proximate cause standard in determining that plaintiff was entitled to benefits. Rather it applied the more lenient "any contribution or aggravating factor" standard set forth in cases decided under Sec. 301 of the act, which applies to claims for compensation benefits where the claim follows immediately after the work-related injury. M.C.L. Sec. 418.301; M.S.A. Sec. 17.237(301). However Sec. 301 does not expressly require a proximate causal connection between the employment and the injury as Sec. 375 does between the employment-related injury and a death subsequent to an adjudication of workers' compensation liability.

Section 301(1) provides:

"An employee, who...