Preview:

Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan 48909 ____________________________________________________________________________________________
C hief Justice Justices

Maura D. Cor rigan

Opinion
PRYOR R. CROWE, ALBERT E. CONANT, and EUAN D. SINGLETON,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v CITY OF DETROIT,
Defendant-Appellee.
____________________________________ BEFORE THE ENTIRE BENCH
CORRIGAN, C.J.
Nos.

Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Clifford W. Taylor Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

FILED JULY 20, 2001





115983, 115984


In this case we are called upon to construe section
161(1)(c)1 of the Worker's Disability Compensation Act, MCL


1

Section 161(1)(c) provides:


Police officers, fire fighters, or employees
of the police or fire departments, or their
dependents, in municipalities or villages of this
state providing like benefits, may waive the
provisions of this act and accept like benefits
that are provided by the municipality or village
but shall not be entitled to like benefits from
both the municipality or village and this act;


418.161.

Section 161(1)(c) authorizes municipalities and


villages to offer injured police officers and fire fighters a
form of compensation that, while like that provided through
Michigan's statutory worker's compensation system, MCL 418.101
et seq., can be tailored to the needs of public safety
officers. The statute allows officers to bargain collectively
for beneficial alternatives to the otherwise mandatory state
system.
Accepting the invitation of the Legislature, the city of
Detroit provides an alternative benefits plan2 in tit IX, ch
VII, art VI, part B,

Download EUAN D SINGLETON V CITY OF DETROIT.pdf

Michigan Law