Naumann v. Foreway Transportation, Inc.

724 N.W.2d 476 (Mich. 2006) · Michigan Supreme Court · December 15, 2006 · No. 131693

Summary

The Michigan Supreme Court denied leave to appeal from a Michigan Court of Appeals order in a workers' compensation dispute. The dissent argued that the plaintiff's failure to stop smoking, which caused cancellation of recommended surgery, could constitute an unreasonable refusal of medical treatment warranting suspension of benefits. The dissent would have remanded for findings on whether the surgery was unreasonably dangerous and offered a reasonable prospect of relieving the plaintiff's incapacity.

Court
Michigan Supreme Court
Writing for the Court
Markman, J. (dissenting)
Jurisdiction
Michigan
Decision date
December 15, 2006
Docket number
131693
Procedural posture
The Michigan Supreme Court denied defendants' application for leave to appeal from the Michigan Court of Appeals' June 29, 2006 order. Justice Markman dissented and would have remanded the matter to the workers' compensation magistrate for further findings.
Precedential value
Published Michigan Supreme Court order denying leave to appeal; the substantive analysis appears only in Justice Markman's dissent.
Parties
Foreway Transportation, Inc., Zurich American Insurance Company v. Rachelle Naumann
Disposition
writ_denied

Topics

workers compensationappellate procedureremedies

Practice areas

workers compensationemployment lawappellate procedureremedies

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Michigan Supreme Court should grant defendants' application for leave to appeal the Workers' Compensation Appellate Commission's decision.
  2. Whether a claimant's failure to comply with a smoking-cessation condition that prevents recommended surgery may constitute a refusal of medical treatment justifying suspension of workers' compensation benefits.
  3. Whether the refusal of surgery was unreasonable without findings concerning the danger of the procedure and its reasonable prospect of relieving the claimant's incapacity or pain.

Holdings

  1. The Michigan Supreme Court denied defendants' application for leave to appeal because it was not persuaded that the questions presented warranted review.

Key quotations

In order to justify the suspension of benefits, defendant must demonstrate that plaintiff unreasonably refused medical treatment. (477)
If the operation is not attended with danger to life or health, or extraordinary suffering, and if, according to the best medical or surgical opinion, the operation offers a reasonable prospect of restoration or relief from the incapacity from which the workman is suffering, then he must either submit to the operation or release his employers from the obligation to maintain him. (477)

Factual background

Plaintiff, a truck driver, suffered a work-related neck injury that prevented her from performing her job. Her physician recommended surgery but required her to stop smoking for six months before the procedure; after three months, plaintiff resumed smoking and the physician canceled the surgery. The workers' compensation magistrate treated this conduct as an unreasonable refusal of medical treatment and suspended benefits, but the Workers' Compensation Appellate Commission reversed.

Procedural history

A workers' compensation magistrate suspended plaintiff's benefits after finding that her failure to stop smoking before scheduled surgery constituted an unreasonable refusal of medical treatment. The Workers' Compensation Appellate Commission reversed. Defendants sought leave to appeal in the Michigan Supreme Court, which denied the application without plenary review.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…