Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 212074; Published
Judges Cavanagh, Sawyer, and Zahra; Unanimous Opinion by Judge Cavanagh
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 242 Mich App 172; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Nature of Survivor’s Loss Benefits [§3108(1)]
Calculation of Survivor’s Loss Benefits and Maximums [§3108(1)]
Dependents [§3108(1)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Legislative Purpose and Intent
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous published Opinion, written by Judge Cavanagh, the Court of Appeals held that under the survivors' loss benefit provisions of section 3108, a child who became the sole beneficiary of his mother's trust was, upon the auto accident death of his mother, entitled to recover survivors' loss benefits based upon the difference between the amount of support the child received from the trust before, as opposed to after, his mother's death, rather than the decrease in the income producing assets (corpus) of the trust, which decrease was caused by the mother's death.
In so holding, the Court of Appeals reversed the circuit court in what it termed "a case of first impression " because the circuit court had ruled that the appropriate measure was the decrease in the income producing assets in the trust caused by the death of the parent. In rejecting the notion that the proper measure of survivors' loss benefits was the diminution of trust principle, the court noted that section 3108 focuses on the loss of support the child would have received had his parent not died. This requires analyzing the difference in support the child received from the trust as the result of the parent's death rather than the diminished value of the trust corpus. In this regard, the Court of Appeals stated in pertinent part:
"The circuit court in this case of first impression was called upon to determine the appropriate measure of [the child's] loss of 'contributions of tangible things of economic value' that he would have received for his support during his dependency from the deceased if she had not died. The court held that the appropriate measure was the decrease in the income-producing assets contained in the trust because of [child's] mother's death and the resulting payments of administrative expenses and taxes with trust assets. However, defendant contends that the proper measure of [child's] no-fault survivor's loss benefits is the difference between the amounts of support he received from the trust before and after his mother's death. We agree with defendant....
"In light of the relevant case law and the clear language of the statute, we conclude that the trial court erred in ruling that the proper measure of [child's] loss was the diminution of the trust principle.... The statute clearly requires a plaintiff in a suit for no-fault survivor's loss benefits to submit proof of a loss of support that would have been received but for the decedent's death.... The trial court erred in not requiring plaintiff to prove the amount of support [child] received from the trust prior to his mother's death and the amount of support he received from the trust after his mother's death. This comparison is the proper measure of [child's] loss of support that he would have received but for his mother's death under the plain meaning of the statute."
