Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 67607; Unpublished
Judges Walsh, T. M. Burns, and Lambros; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Determining Serious Impairment of Body Function as a Matter of Law (Cassidy Era – 1983-1986) [§3135(1)]
Trial Procedure Issues [§3135]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
This unanimous per curiam Opinion deals with several issues involved in the jury trial of serious impairment cases. First, the court held that where there is a factual dispute which is material to the determination of whether plaintiff suffered serious impairment, the court should not rule on this issue as a matter of law and should permit it to go to a jury. Second, the court held that SJI 2d, 36.01 which utilizes the phrase "serious impairment of a body function" is an accurate instruction. Third, based upon the previous decision in Karas v White (Item No. 354), it would have been reversible error for the court to have instructed on all threshold elements where only serious impairment was in issue. Fourth, the court held that the trial court did not commit error by not adding to SJI 2d, 36.01 the phrase that "permanency is nevertheless relevant."