Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 83106; Unpublished
Judges MacKenzie, McDonald, and Robinson; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Wage Loss for Temporarily Unemployed Persons / Qualifications [§3107a]
Trial Procedure Issues [§3135]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Collateral Estoppel and Res Judicata
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals decided two issues. First, the Court reversed the trial court's determination that plaintiff was not entitled to wage loss-benefits because plaintiff was unemployed at the time of the accident. The Court of Appeals held that this ruling was erroneous because plaintiff properly qualified as a "temporarily unemployed” person within the meaning of §3107a. Plaintiff had lost his job a month or so prior to his accident because of excessive tardiness and poor workmanship. He had applied for unemployment benefits and had contacted six different companies in search of employment. He had also arranged a job interview which was to take place after the automobile accident. Under those circumstances, the Court stated that plaintiff was temporarily unemployed and therefore entitled to work loss benefits.
Second, the Court affirmed the trial court's ruling that plaintiff was not entitled to amend his complaint regarding his allegation of serious impairment of body function because his claim had been dismissed prior to the DiFranco holding and the dismissal had been affirmed on appeal. Thus, even though plaintiff learned subsequently that he had a ruptured disc that was disclosed by myelogram, the doctrine of res judicata prevented plaintiff from amending his lawsuit to allege the new injury. The Court stated, "DiFranco is limited to cases pending before this court in which the issue of serious impairment of body function had been raised and preserved. Thus, the DiFranco decision lends no support to plaintiff’s request to file an amended complaint. The doctrine of res judicata bars plaintiff from filing an amended complaint based on an action already decided on the merits."
