Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 186000; Unpublished
Judges Markman, Smolenski, and Buth; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Work Loss Benefits: Nature of the Benefit [§3107(1)(b)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous per curiam unpublished Opinion, the Court of Appeals held work loss benefits were not available to plaintiff where he was already disabled prior to the automobile accident.
Plaintiff claimed wage loss benefits arising from mental disability as a result of witnessing his ex-wife's death in the accident. The accident in this case occurred on February 16,1990. Plaintiff was driving his car and his ex-wife was a front seat passenger. A freeway sign fell onto the roof of the car and killed plaintiffs ex-wife. Auto Club paid funeral benefits and survivors' loss benefits to plaintiffs children, and property damage to the car. However, Auto Club declined payment of plaintiff s claim for wage loss benefits.
At the time of the accident, plaintiff was employed but on medical disability leave. In May, 1990, plaintiff applied for social security benefits, indicating on the application that he was first disabled from working on January 2, 1990, (six weeks before the automobile accident). The Social Security Administration determined that plaintiff suffered from a psychiatric disorder and that he was disabled from work as of January 2,1990, and awarded him benefits based on this determination.
In September 1990, plaintiff submitted an application for no-fault work loss benefits listing an emotional injury arising from witnessing the death of his ex-wife. The parties stipulated to arbitrate the matter pursuant to the insurance contract, and an arbitration award was rendered in favor of plaintiff. The circuit court affirmed the award.
On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the award and held that work loss benefits are unavailable to persons unable to work because of disabilities unrelated to an automobile accident, because they have no income from work or its equivalent to lose. MacDonald v State Farm Mutual Insurance Company, 419 Mich 146 (1984).
Under §3107(l)(b), the Court of Appeals held that work loss benefits were unavailable to plaintiff because he was totally disabled from working prior to the accident at issue. Thus, the Court of Appeals held that the arbitrators erred as a matter of law in concluding that plaintiff was entitled to work loss benefits.
Because its ruling under §3107(l)(b) was dispositive, the Court of Appeals did not address Auto Club's argument that plaintiffs injuries did not arise out of the accident and that psychiatric injuries did not constitute a bodily injury under §3105(1).
