Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 77389; Published
Judges Bronson, Gillis, and Dodge; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 146 Mich App 150; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Serious Impairment of Body Function Definition (Cassidy Era – 1983-1986) [§3135(1)]
Objective Manifestation Element of Serious Impairment (Cassidy Era – 1983-1986) [§3135(1)]
Important Body Function Element of Serious Impairment (Cassidy Era – 1983-1986) [§3135(1)]
General Ability / Normal Life Element of Serious Impairment (Cassidy Era – 1983-1986) [§3135(1)]
Determining Serious Impairment of Body Function as a Matter of Law (Cassidy Era – 1983-1986) [§3135(1)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment in favor of defendant on the threshold issue of serious impairment of body function. Plaintiff was injured on March 30,1981. The general character of her injuries was not seriously disputed. Plaintiff complained of soft tissue injuries to her lower back. Medical reports indicated tenderness and spasms of the posterior cervical muscles, and she was diagnosed as sustaining a sprain, cervical and lumbosacral with myositis. Results of x-rays, electromyographic exam and straight leg-raising tests were all normal. Plaintiff’s treating physicians stated that she was partially disabled until June 30,1981, but there was no evidence that she was disabled after that date.
The Court of Appeals concluded that the facts in mis case do not support plaintiff’s claim of serious impairment of body function. The court stated that while plaintiff may experience difficulties in her daily life,-such difficulties did not interfere in any significant manner with plaintiff’s normal lifestyle.
