Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 147793; Unpublished
Judges Brennan, Reilly, and Danhof; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Serious Impairment of Body Function Definition (DiFranco Era – 1987-1995) [§3135(1)]
Determining Serious Impairment of Body Function as a Matter of Law (DiFranco Era – 1987-1995) [§3135(1)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous per curiam unpublished Opinion, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court grant of summary disposition in favor of the defendant on the issue of serious impairment of body function.
Plaintiffs injury consisted of a sprained ankle, which the trial court ruled too minor to meet the threshold.
On appeal, the Court of Appeals held that plaintiffs ankle injury may have resulted in a serious impairment of a body function based upon the fact that, more than a year after the injury, plaintiff testified that he could not walk a block without pain. Further, a medical report indicated that plaintiff suffered a severe ankle sprain and was placed in a cast for eight weeks. According to the doctor's opinion, plaintiff was disabled from doing any work involving constant and repetitive standing, walking or squatting. Therapy would not improve the condition, only prevent it from deteriorating.
Viewing this evidence in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, the Court of Appeals held that reasonable minds could differ as to whether plaintiff’s injury constituted a serious impairment of a body function. Therefore, the decision of the trial court granting summary disposition in favor of the defendants was reversed.