Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 95418; Published
Judges Danhof, MacKenzie, and Swallow; Unanimous
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 163 Mich App 487; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Work Loss Benefits: Nature of the Benefit [§3107(1)(b)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous Opinion by Judge Swallow, the Court of Appeals ruled that plaintiff’s automobile no-fault insurer properly suspended no-fault work loss benefits to plaintiff upon plaintiff’s incarceration in the county jail for charges of negligent homicide arising from an automobile accident Plaintiff argued that he was entitled to receive no-fault benefits for the reason that his inability to work due to his incarceration was solely the result of the automobile accident in question. In ruling that plaintiff was not entitled to receive no-fault benefits after the commencement of his incarceration, the Court relied upon the Supreme Court's decision in MacDonald v State Farm (Item No 775). The Court of Appeals stated, "We believe plaintiff’s arrest and conviction, resulting in incarceration in a similarly independent intervening event preventing plaintiff’s gainful employment. We reach this conclusion despite the fact that plaintiff’s disabling injuries and his incarceration arose from the same event, the automobile accident. The statute provides that benefits be paid for loss of income from work an injured person would have performed 'if he had not been insured.' In contrast, plaintiff seeks work loss benefits for work he would have performed if he had not been involved in the accident. However, the statute clearly indicates that the cause of the work loss must be the accident-related injuries, not the accident itself. Plaintiff’s incarceration is clearly unrelated to the injuries he sustained."
