Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket Nos. 71697 and 71834; Published
Judges Hood, Beasley, and Marutiak; Unanimous
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 141 Mich App 802; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Exclusion for Parked Vehicles Covered by Workers Comp [§3106(2)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Legislative Purpose and Intent
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous Opinion by Judge Hood, the court interpreted the new amendment to the parked vehicle provisions of §3106 which excludes from no-fault benefits those employees who sustain injury in the course of employment while loading, unloading or doing mechanical work on a vehicle, unless the injury arose from the use or operation of another vehicle. The specific issue in this case was whether or not the terms loading and unloading should be interpreted narrowly to exclude activity preparatory to the actual lifting or lowering of goods. The Court of Appeals ruled that the terms loading and unloading in §3106(2) should be interpreted to encompass activity that was preparatory to the actual lifting or lowering of goods. The court held that such a broad definition of the terms was consistent with the Legislature's intention in amending this section. The court stated, "The House Legislative Analysis Section's report on the proposed amendment states that the trucking industry lobbied for this amendment because it claimed its insurance rates were climbing due to the common-place incidents of disabling injuries occurring during the loading, unloading, and mechanical servicing of its vehicles. Under the former §3106, its injured employees collected both workers' compensation and no-fault benefits."