Injured? Contact Sinas Dramis for a free consultation.

   

Peoples v Halton (After Remand); (COA-UNP, 11/20/2001, RB #2258)

Print

Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket #220987; Unpublished
Judges Smolenski, McDonald and Jansen; unanimous; per curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not applicable, Link to Opinion courthouse graphic


STATUTORY INDEXING:
Noneconomic Loss Liability for Serious Impairment of Body Function Definition [3135(7)]
Closed Head Injury Question of Fact [3135(2)(a)(ii)]

TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not applicable


CASE SUMMARY:
After the remand of Item No. 2224, the trial court determined that a factual dispute existed concerning plaintiff's claim that her closed head injury constituted serious impairment of body function. The trial court based this determination upon an affidavit filed by plaintiff's physician which attested to the fact that plaintiff had a “serious neurological injury, specifically that [plaintiff] is suffering from a closed head injury and traumatic brain injury sustained in the automobile accident.” The Court of Appeals ruled that the trial court correctly concluded that this affidavit satisfied the requirements of section 3135(2)(a)(ii) and therefore, a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding plaintiff's claim.


STATUTORY INDEXING:

MCL 500.3135

Noneconomic Loss Liability for Serious Impairment of Body Function Threshold (Definition) [3135(1)]


TOPICAL INDEXING:

Not applicable


After the remand of Item No. 2224, the trial court determined that a factual dispute existed concerning plaintiff's claim that her closed head injury constituted serious impairment of body function. The trial court based this determination upon an affidavit filed by plaintiff's physician which attested to the fact that plaintiff had a “serious neurological injury, specifically that [plaintiff] is suffering from a closed head injury and traumatic brain injury sustained in the automobile accident.” The Court of Appeals ruled that the trial court correctly concluded that this affidavit satisfied the requirements of section 3135(2)(a)(ii) and therefore, a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding plaintiff's claim.


Michigan auto accident attorney Stephen Sinas is the lead editor of the appellate case summaries published on this site regarding the Michigan auto insurance law. To learn more about how Stephen Sinas and how the Sinas Dramis Law Firm can help you if you have been injured in a Michigan auto accident, visit SinasDramis.com.

Copyright © 2024  Sinas Dramis Law Firm, George Sinas, Stephen Sinas.
All Rights Reserved.
Login (Publishers Only)

FacebookInstagram