Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket #215052; Unpublished
Judges Murphy, Hood and Neff; 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)]
Objective Manifestation Element of Serious Impairment [3135(7)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
After the remand of Item No. 2151, the trial court again issued summary disposition in favor of defendant for the reason that plaintiff had not suffered an objectively manifested impairment and again the Court of Appeals reversed. Employing the DiFranco v Pickard definition of objectively manifested injury, the Court of Appeals held:
“For an impairment to be objectively manifested, there must be a medically identifiable injury or condition that has a physical basis. In this case, the evidence established that plaintiff had a large hematoma over her spine, which, according to her physician, was causing a fair portion of her pain. She was diagnosed with lumbosacral sprain. Further, a positive straight-leg raising test produced pain,... Medical testimony indicated that plaintiff's physical examination was fifty percent objective and fifty percent subjective. We find that these undisputed facts established an objectively manifested impairment sufficient to survive defendant's motion for summary disposition.”
