Peoples v Halton (After Remand); (COA-UNP, 11/20/2001, RB #2258)

Print

Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket #220987; Unpublished
Judges Smolenski, McDonald and Jansen; unanimous; per curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not applicable, Link to Opinion courthouse graphic

STATUTORY INDEXING:
Noneconomic Loss Liability for Serious Impairment of Body Function Definition [3135(7)]
Closed Head Injury Question of Fact [3135(2)(a)(ii)]

TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not applicable

CASE SUMMARY:
After the remand of Item No. 2224, the trial court determined that a factual dispute existed concerning plaintiff's claim that her closed head injury constituted serious impairment of body function. The trial court based this determination upon an affidavit filed by plaintiff's physician which attested to the fact that plaintiff had a “serious neurological injury, specifically that [plaintiff] is suffering from a closed head injury and traumatic brain injury sustained in the automobile accident.” The Court of Appeals ruled that the trial court correctly concluded that this affidavit satisfied the requirements of section 3135(2)(a)(ii) and therefore, a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding plaintiff's claim.


STATUTORY INDEXING:

MCL 500.3135

Noneconomic Loss Liability for Serious Impairment of Body Function Threshold (Definition) [3135(1)]


TOPICAL INDEXING:

Not applicable


After the remand of Item No. 2224, the trial court determined that a factual dispute existed concerning plaintiff's claim that her closed head injury constituted serious impairment of body function. The trial court based this determination upon an affidavit filed by plaintiff's physician which attested to the fact that plaintiff had a “serious neurological injury, specifically that [plaintiff] is suffering from a closed head injury and traumatic brain injury sustained in the automobile accident.” The Court of Appeals ruled that the trial court correctly concluded that this affidavit satisfied the requirements of section 3135(2)(a)(ii) and therefore, a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding plaintiff's claim.