Etheridge v. JJ Curran Crane Co.

1 Citing case

  1. N. Mut. Ins. Co. v. The Cincinnati Ins. Co.

    627 F. Supp. 3d 743 (E.D. Mich. 2022)

    Michigan courts have applied the economic reality test using the factors identified by the parties in their filings. See Van Lieu v. Farm Bureau Gen. Ins. Co. of Mich., No. 330014, 2017 WL 786949, at *3 (Mich. Ct. App. Feb. 28, 2017) (stating that "[f]or purposes of MCL 500.3114(3), whether an injured party was an employee is determined by applying the economic reality test" and indicating that "[t]he economic reality test requires the court to consider" the seven factors identified by the parties in this case); Etheridge v. JJ Curran Crane Co., No. 356775, 2022 WL 497352, at *2 (Mich. Ct. App. Feb. 17, 2022); Toduti, 2021 WL 4001802, at *3; Bolen v. Marada Indus., Inc., No. 348765, 2021 WL 641709, at *5-6 (Mich. Ct. App. Feb. 18, 2021), appeal denied, 508 Mich. 945, 964 N.W.2d 371 (2021), reconsideration denied, — Mich. —, 967 N.W.2d 610 (2022); Doe v. Grand Co., LLC, No. 18-cv-13123, 2020 WL 806031, at *12 (E.D. Mich. Feb. 18, 2020); Vojnika v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 331470, 2017 WL 2704905, at *2 (Mich. Ct. App. June 22, 2017); Farm Bureau Gen. Ins. Co. of Am. v. Westfield Ins. Co., No. 330961, 2017 WL 2348747, at *4 & n.1 (Mich. Ct. App. May 30, 2017); Marougi v. Auto Club Ins. Ass'n, No. 322120, 2015 WL 6439785, at *2 (Mich. Ct. App. Oct. 22, 2015). The Michigan Court of Appeals recently held in Duckworth v. Cherokee Ins. Co. that when applying the economic reality test in the context of the No-Fault Act, the factors from a few cases should be considered: (1) Parham v. Preferred Risk Mut. Ins. Co., 124 Mich. App. 618, 335 N.W.2d 106 (1983), and/or Adanalic v. Harco Nat. I