602 N.W.2d 577
No. 111750.Supreme Court of Michigan.
September 15, 1999.
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal is considered, and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(F)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration as on leave granted of the following issue: Did the magistrate err as a matter of law by concluding that the plaintiff did not terminate from “active employment” within the meaning of MCL 418.373(1); MSA 17.237(373)(1) where, during an anticipated recovery period of two months or less following arthroscopic surgery, the 55-year-old plaintiff chose to retire from employment and take a non-disability pension?
Cavanagh and Kelly, JJ., would deny leave to appeal.
Court of Appeals No. 207365.