Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 80407; Published
Judges Gribbs, Cynar, and Duggan; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 148 Mich App 308; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Exclusion for Vehicles Considered Parked [§3106(1)]
Exception for Permanently Mounted Equipment Use [§3106(1)(b)]
Exception for Loading / Unloading [§3106(1)(b)]
Exception for Occupying [§3106(1)(c)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous per curiam Opinion, on leave granted, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's denial of the motion of defendant for summary judgment.
Plaintiff was injured in the course of his employment as a driver of a refuse truck while loading a large free-standing metal waste container onto his truck. The injury occurred on April 21,1981, and therefore was not governed by the provisions of MCLA 500.3106(2); MSA 24.13106(2), effective December 31, 1981. The Court of Appeals noted in a footnote that this later added section would have barred
recovery under the circumstances.
Plaintiff had hooked a cable to the waste container, but prior to engaging the hydraulic mechanism which would have winched the container onto the truck, plaintiff had climbed onto the adjacent loading dock to throw wooden pallets into the waste container. Plaintiff was standing with one foot on the loading dock and one foot on the waste container and at that time injured himself while throwing a pallet.
The Court of Appeals concluded that plaintiff’s injury was not the direct result of physical contact with equipment permanently mounted on the vehicle as required by §3106(b), and his injury did not directly result from physical contact with property being loaded onto lowered from his vehicle. The court also concluded that plaintiff’s injury did not occur while he was occupying his vehicle, as required by §3106(c). The court found mat plaintiff had not physically occupied the vehicle immediately prior to the accident, as in Hathcox (Item No. 70), nor did he have physical contact with his vehicle at the time. The court reversed and remanded for entry of summary judgment for defendant.
