Workmen's Compensation - Injury Suffered During Coffee Break as Arising Out of and in the Course of Employment

Authors

Hazen V. Hatch S.Ed., University of Michigan Law SchoolFollow

Abstract

Plaintiff was employed by defendant laundry company as a mangle operator. A collective bargaining agreement between the defendant and the union representing its employees provided for two paid ten minute rest periods during the work day. Plaintiff left the defendant's premises during such a rest period and went to a nearby restaurant. On her return she slipped on ice on defendant's front step and was injured." The Department of Labor and Industry found the injury compensable under the Michigan Workmen's Compensation Act. On appeal, held, reversed, two justices dissenting. The place of the injury is not determinative of eligibility for compensation. Because defendant had no control over plaintiff's actions and because plaintiff was not actively engaged in rendering a service to defendant at the time of the accident, the injury did not arise out of and in the course of plaintiff's employment. Salmon v. Bagley Laundry Co., 344 Mich. 471, 74 N.W. (2d) 1 (1955).

Recommended Citation

Hazen V. Hatch S.Ed., Workmen's Compensation - Injury Suffered During Coffee Break as Arising Out of and in the Course of Employment, 54 Mich. L. Rev. 1192 (1956).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol54/iss8/15