Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 74121; Published
Judges Danhof, T. M Burns and Bell; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 145 Mich App 593; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Entitlement to PIP Benefits: Arising Out of / Causation Requirement [§3105(1)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s refusal to grant summary judgment in favor of defendant on the issue of whether plaintiff’s injuries arose out of the ownership, operation, maintenance or use of a motor vehicle under §3105(1). Plaintiff claimed no-fault benefits for injuries sustained when she fell on a patch of ice while walking from her disabled vehicle toward a tow truck. The court held that irrespective of whether plaintiff was deemed to be "occupying" or "maintaining" a motor vehicle there simply was an inadequate causal connection established between that activity and the injuries sustained. The court stated, “This court has previously recognized that the typical slip-and-fall injury occasioned by icy conditions where the no-fault claimant is simply going to or from a motor vehicle is 'without causal connection with the ownership, maintenance and use of a motor vehicle.'" Therefore, the court held that summary judgment should have been granted in favor of defendant.
Judge T. M. Burns dissented. He would hold that there was a sufficient causal connection by virtue of the fact that plaintiff slipped and fell while maintaining her car. Judge Burns stated, "While plaintiff could have slipped anywhere as the majority notes, she was exposed to this particular hazard because of the need to repair her car."