Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket #253020; Unpublished
Judges Borrello, Bandstra, and Kelly; unanimous; per curiam
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 [3135(7)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous unpublished per curiam, decided without oral argument after the Supreme Court’s decision in Kreiner v Fischer [RB #2428], interpreting the statutory definition of serious body function, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s grant of directed verdict in favor of defendant on plaintiff’s claim for non-economic loss.
Plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle accident on November 6, 1998. He sustained injuries consisting of a chipped elbow, bruised ribs, and an injured left big toe. He saw an osteopathic physician within two weeks. His elbow stopped hurting within two weeks of the accident. Four or five weeks later his ribs healed. Plaintiff missed only one day of work following the accident. During the four or five weeks healing of his rib injury, plaintiff claims his marital relations were diminished and he could not perform household tasks, such as putting salt in the water softener, taking out the trash, or shoveling the snow.
At the conclusion of proofs, the trial court granted defendant’s motion for directed verdict on the issue of serious impairment. After plaintiff filed an appeal, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Kreiner v Fischer, supra. On remand, the Court of Appeals held the evidence failed to demonstrate that the plaintiff’s injuries affected his ability to live a normal life. Accordingly, plaintiff failed to establish a serious impairment of body function within the meaning of §3135(7), and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiff’s motion for a new trial.
