Lullo v Heikkila; (COA-UNP, 7/10/2001, RB #2225)

Print

Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket #226065;
Unpublished  Judges Saad, Holbrook and Murphy; unanimous  
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not applicable, Link to Opinion


STATUTORY INDEXING: 
Serious Impairment of Body Function Definition (Kreiner Era: 1996-2010) [§3135(7)]   
General Ability / Normal Life Element of Serious Impairment (Kreiner Era: 1996-2010) [§3135(7)]

TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not applicable


CASE SUMMARY:  
In this unanimous unpublished memorandum opinion, decided without oral argument, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court order granting defendant's motion for summary disposition on plaintiff's claim of serious impairment of body function. The plaintiff's injury was a non-specified “back injury.” The trial court granted summary disposition for the reason that the injury did not affect plaintiff's ability to lead her normal life. In affirming the decision, the court stated,“Here, the trial court properly compared plaintiff's lifestyle before and after the accident to determine no factual dispute existed with respect to her injuries. Plaintiff continued to engage in similar activities after the accident. She experienced pain, but the only activities affected were her reduced ability to run, and the limitation on the type of exercises she could perform. There is no showing that the trial court erred in concluding that plaintiff's impairment did not affect her general ability to lead a normal life.”