In a previous decision, Karaszewski v Farbman, Stein & Co., 474 Mich 1087 (2006), the Michigan Supreme Court held that, in order for an employee who is injured out-of-state to collect Michigan workers’ compensation benefits, the statute, MCL 418.845, requires that the employee prove both that the contract of hire was entered into in Michigan and that the employee was a resident of Michigan at the time of the injury. A bill was introduced by Senator Allen on November 6, 2008, to amend MCL 418.845. The amendment would permit an employee who sustains a work related injury out of state to receive workers’ compensation benefits “if either the employee is a resident of this state at the time of injury or the contract of hire was made in this state.” The bill passed the Michigan Senate on November 13, 2008. The bill has been referred to the Committee on Labor, apparently to coordinate passage of the bill in the House of Representatives. Reportedly, the bill was supported by both employer and employee advocates. Many Michigan employers have employees who work out of state. If an employer did not have insurance coverage for out of state work injuries, and an employee was injured out of state but did not qualify for Michigan workers’ compensation, the employee would not have access to the financial safety net and medical treatment afforded by workers’ compensation benefits. Arguably, the employer would not have the benefit of the exclusive remedy provision of the workers’ compensation statute and the employee could then sue the employer for unlimited personal injury damages, including pain and suffering. If the amendment to MCL 418.845 passes and is signed into law, it will clarify jurisdiction for out of state injuries and nullify the holding in the Karaszewski case. Please share this summary with others who may be interested in it. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this further, please do not hesitate to contact us. 11/21/08