## Facts

- William Stewart worked for Chrysler Corporation operating one of five milling machines in a row.
- A roller conveyor ran west of and parallel to the machines, carrying motor blocks; short side tracks fed blocks from the conveyor to each machine.
- Chrysler provided removable “stile”-type steps on both sides of the conveyor opposite each machine so workers could cross the conveyor as a convenient route when coming to or leaving work stations, getting water, and similar purposes.
- Jake McCoy, also a Chrysler employee, worked along the west side of the conveyor moving motor blocks with a five-foot stick fitted with a coat-hanger attachment.
- To give himself room to walk next to the conveyor, McCoy commonly moved the steps on the west side about a foot and a half away from the conveyor, and would move them back when machine operators asked to cross.
- Stewart and McCoy had repeated arguments about the position of the portable steps opposite Stewart’s machine.
- On the day of the incident, McCoy moved the steps away again; Stewart protested and, at least twice, moved the steps back to their usual position, after which McCoy moved them away again.
- The dispute escalated at the conveyor: Stewart stood on the top step on the east side, reached over the conveyor, and struck (slapped) McCoy.
- McCoy immediately struck Stewart with the stick, inflicting injuries from which Stewart died.
- McCoy was later convicted of manslaughter.
- Stewart’s widow, Irene Stewart, filed a claim for workers’ compensation death benefits.
- The workmen’s compensation appeal board awarded benefits, treating it as immaterial that Stewart struck the first blow despite prior Michigan decisions denying compensation to an aggressor in a work-connected fight.
- Chrysler appealed the award to the Michigan Supreme Court.

## Issues

1. Whether Stewart’s fatal injury in a fight that began as a workplace dispute over employer-provided steps “arose out of” the employment when Stewart initiated the physical violence by striking first.
2. Whether Michigan precedent barring compensation to the aggressor in a work-connected fight required reversal of the appeal board’s award.

## Decision

- The Michigan Supreme Court held that Stewart’s fatal injury did not arise out of his employment because Stewart was the aggressor in the altercation.
- The Court ruled that prior Michigan authority (including *Horvath v. La Fond*) controlled and barred recovery by an employee who starts a work-connected fight.
- The Court reversed the workmen’s compensation appeal board’s award of death benefits.

## Legal Principles

- In Michigan (as applied in this case), the aggressor in an admittedly work-connected fight is not entitled to workers’ compensation for resulting injury or death.
- “Arising out of employment” requires more than a job-related quarrel; when the employee initiates physical combat, the resulting harm is treated as stemming from the employee’s personal act rather than a compensable employment risk.
- Administrative tribunals must apply binding state supreme court precedent; a finding that the first blow is “immaterial” cannot stand where controlling decisions make aggression outcome-determinative.
- Even when workplace conditions or employer-provided equipment give rise to the argument, the claimant’s status as the physical aggressor can defeat the causal connection required for compensation.

## Conclusion

Because Stewart struck his co-worker first during a dispute over the placement of employer-provided steps, the Michigan Supreme Court treated him as the aggressor in a work-connected fight and concluded that his death did not arise out of the employment. The Court therefore reversed the workers’ compensation appeal board’s award of death benefits to Stewart’s widow.


Stewart v. Chrysler Corp., 87 N.W.2d 117, 350 Mich. 596 (1957)