STOKES v CHRYSLER - PROOF OF DISABILITY - DECIDED BY MICHIGAN SUPREME COURT The Michigan Supreme Court released its decision in Stokes v Chrysler LLC on June 12, 2008 (Case No. 132648). In a 4-3 decision, the court reversed the decision of the Court of Appeals (Stokes v Daimler Chrysler Corp., 272 Mich App 571 (2006)). The Court of Appeals had held that, once an employee had proved inability, due to a work related injury and impairment, to perform jobs the employee had previously performed, the employee had satisfied his burden to prove a baseline case of compensability and the burden then shifted to the employer to show that the employee was not disabled by proving that there were other jobs suitable to the employee’s training and qualifications which paid the maximum wages that the employee had previously earned. The Supreme Court held that an employee must show more than a mere inability to perform a previous job in order to shift the burden of proof to the employer. The Court held that the employee must prove that he is disabled from all jobs he is qualified to perform within the same salary or pay range as his maximum earning capacity at the time of injury. The employer would then have the opportunity to prove the existence of jobs paying the employee’s maximum wage within his qualifications and training, and prove that the employee is not disabled. The Court also required the employee to disclose all of his education, experience, skills, training and qualifications, whether or not relevant to the job the claimant was performing at the time of the injury. The Court, in overruling the Court of Appeals, held that the employer has the right to “discovery” regarding the employee’s transferable skills. The Court held that an employer had the right to retain a vocational expert to interview the employee and perform a transferable skills analysis. In summary, the Court clarified what the employee has to prove, and what information the employer has access to, in determining whether an employee is disabled within the meaning of the Court’s prior decision in Sington v Chrysler Corp, 467 Mich 144; 648 NW2d 624 (2002). It is important to remember that an employee only needs to prove inability to perform jobs within his or her maximum salary or pay range.STOKES v CHRYSLER - PROOF OF DISABILITY - DECIDED BY MICHIGAN SUPREME COURT The Michigan Supreme Court released its decision in Stokes v Chrysler LLC on June 12, 2008 (Case No. 132648). In a 4-3 decision, the court reversed the decision of the Court of Appeals (Stokes v Daimler Chrysler Corp., 272 Mich App 571 (2006)). The Court of Appeals had held that, once an employee had proved inability, due to a work related injury and impairment, to perform jobs the employee had previously performed, the employee had satisfied his burden to prove a baseline case of compensability and the burden then shifted to the employer to show that the employee was not disabled by proving that there were other jobs suitable to the employee’s training and qualifications which paid the maximum wages that the employee had previously earned. The Supreme Court held that an employee must show more than a mere inability to perform a previous job in order to shift the burden of proof to the employer. The Court held that the employee must prove that he is disabled from all jobs he is qualified to perform within the same salary or pay range as his maximum earning capacity at the time of injury. The employer would then have the opportunity to prove the existence of jobs paying the employee’s maximum wage within his qualifications and training, and prove that the employee is not disabled. The Court also required the employee to disclose all of his education, experience, skills, training and qualifications, whether or not relevant to the job the claimant was performing at the time of the injury. The Court, in overruling the Court of Appeals, held that the employer has the right to “discovery” regarding the employee’s transferable skills. The Court held that an employer had the right to retain a vocational expert to interview the employee and perform a transferable skills analysis. In summary, the Court clarified what the employee has to prove, and what information the employer has access to, in determining whether an employee is disabled within the meaning of the Court’s prior decision in Sington v Chrysler Corp, 467 Mich 144; 648 NW2d 624 (2002). It is important to remember that an employee only needs to prove inability to perform jobs within his or her maximum salary or pay range.