68th District Court (Genesee County); Docket No. 6B-3600
Judge Kenneth M. Siegel; Written Opinion; Unpublished
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Work Loss Benefits: Calculation of Benefits [§3107(1)(b)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
This written Opinion by Judge Kenneth Siegel involves an issue of first impression dealing with the interpretation of one sentence in the wage loss provisions of §3107(b) of this statute. The sentence in question reads, "The benefits payable for work loss sustained in a single 30 day period and the income earned by an injured person for work during the same period together shall not exceed [the pertinent monthly maximum], which maximum shall apply pro rata to any lesser period of time." In this case, the monthly maximum for work loss benefits was $2,434 per 30 day period. Plaintiff missed 13 days of work due to an automobile accident. The amount earned by plaintiff during the balance of the 30 day period exceeds this maximum. Defendant insurance company argued that under the quoted section, there is no compensable work loss benefit due under the act. Plaintiff disagreed, arguing that the 30 day period must be pro-rated to a daily amount so as to provide coverage for the 13 days. The Court ruled that plaintiff’s interpretation was correct. Therefore, where an insured has a work loss period less than 30 days and his income for the remaining days in the 30 day period exceeds the maximum, plaintiff is entitled to work loss benefits for the time missed from work calculated on a pro-rated basis, even though his total income for the 30 day period exceeds the monthly maximum. The Court reached this holding because it concluded that "the no-fault act is intended not to limit the total amount an individual can earn during a 30 day period, but rather it is intended to limit how much work loss income he can be compensated for."
