Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 163754; Unpublished
Judges Murphy, Griffin, and Crane; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Serious Impairment of Body Function Definition (DiFranco Era – 1987-1995) [§3135(1)]
Determining Serious Impairment of Body Function As a Matter of Law (DiFranco Era – 1987-1995) [§3135(1)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In a one-page per curiam unpublished decision, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's denial of plaintiffs motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and a motion for new trial, after a defense verdict in this third-party liability action.
The plaintiff had brought suit against defendant after defendant's car had collided with plaintiffs motorcycle, resulting in injuries to plaintiff. Upon the conclusion of trial, the jury determined that plaintiff was not entitled to recover damages, because plaintiff had not suffered a serious impairment of body function. The Court of Appeals opinion did not describe plaintiffs injuries. However, the court held that as reasonable minds could differ as to whether plaintiff had suffered serious impairment of bodily function, the matter was properly submitted to the jury and further, that the trial court had correctly denied plaintiffs motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Moreover, the Court of Appeals concluded that the jury's finding was not against the great weight of the evidence, and therefore, the trial court did not err in denying plaintiffs motion for a new trial.
