JOHN L HAMILTON V CITY OF DETROIT
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
JOHN HAMILTON,
UNPUBLISHED
April 20, 2001
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v
No. 210634
WCAC
LC No. 94-000369
CITY OF DETROIT and
SECOND INJURY FUND,
Defendants-Appellees.
Before: Kelly, P.J., and White and Wilder, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
This matter is before us on remand from the Supreme Court for consideration as on leave
granted. 456 Mich 951. Our decision is controlled by this Court’s decision in Crowe v Detroit,
237 Mich App 397; 603 NW2d 107 (1999), lv gtd 463 Mich 905; 618 NW2d 772 (2000). We
therefore affirm.
Plaintiff became a Detroit police officer in 1963. In July 1967, he was shot several times.
Plaintiff received a work-related “disability pension” of two-thirds of his pay from 1967 until
November 18, 1988. Plaintiff’s benefits during those years were “like benefits” under MCL
418.161(1)(c); MSA 17.237(161)(1)(c). In November 1988, defendant began paying plaintiff a
“reduced disability allowance” in the same amount as plaintiff would have received if he had
simply retired at that point (i.e., after 25 years of creditable service).
Plaintiff argues that when his pension was reduced to the level of a regular retirement
benefit, it, in effect, ceased to be a disability benefit and became a regular pension, and therefore
was no longer a “like benefit” under the statute. This issue was decided in Crowe, supra, in
favor of defendant. Crowe concluded that the nature of the “like benefits” did not change just
because the amount of benefits was reduced, in accordance with the terms of the pension scheme,
to the same amount a regularly retired officer would receive. Crowe controls the instant case,
MCR 7.215(I), and dictates that the WCAC be affirmed.1
1
Because the Supreme Court has granted leave in Crowe, it is unnecessary for this panel to
express an opinion regarding whether Crowe was correctly decided.
-1-
In light of Crowe, we do not reach plaintiff’s argument that the magistrate and the WCAC
should have found him totally and permanently disabled under MCL 418.361(3)(g); MSA
17.237(361)(3)(g)(total loss of industrial use of both legs).
Affirmed.
/s/ Michael J. Kelly
/s/ Helene N. White
/s/ Kurtis T. Wilder
-2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
