Opinion
No. 134924.
December 27, 2007.
Court of Appeals No. 277024.
Summary Dispositions December 27, 2007:
Pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we remand this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration as on leave granted. The Court of Appeals shall include among the issues addressed whether the plaintiffs medical proofs satisfied his burden of proving that the damage done to his heart by the work he performed during the course of his heart attack was medically distinguishable and that the condition of his heart was made significantly worse than it would have been without performance of the work. If the Court of Appeals answers this question in the affirmative, it shall specifically identify the evidence it relied upon to reach that conclusion. MCL 418.301(2); Rakestraw v Gen Dynamics Land Systems, Inc, 469 Mich 220 (2003); Fahr v Gen Motors Corp, 478 Mich 922 (2007). We do not retain jurisdiction.