Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 86328; Unpublished
Judges MacKenzie, Bronson, and Benson; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Work Loss Benefits: Nature of the Benefit [§3107(1)(b)]
Work Loss Benefits: Loss of Earning Capacity [§3107(1)(b)]
Liability for Excess Economic Loss Caused by Insured Tortfeasors [§3135(3)(b)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unpublished per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's grant of summary disposition as to the issue of serious impairment of body function. As to the trial court's grant of summary disposition on the issue of plaintiff’s entitlement to recover wage loss in excess of the three year limitation contained in §3107(b), the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Plaintiff, a 53-year-old woman, was injured when her car was struck from behind by a milk truck. Her injuries consisted of pain in her neck, back and knees for which she was not hospitalized. She missed two or three weeks from work. After the accident, plaintiff encountered continual difficulty performing her job due to pain and aching. Nearly two years after the accident, plaintiff took an early retirement from her job, claiming that she would have continued to work at full wage until age 62 but for her injuries. Plaintiff sought to recover the difference between her retirement income and the income that she would have received but for her early retirement.
The Court of Appeals, upon reviewing the record, held that plaintiff had not satisfied the threshold for recovery of non-economic damage because she had not shown an objectively manifested injury constituting a serious impairment of body function. However, the Court of Appeals held that the trial court had erred in granting summary disposition on plaintiff’s claim for economic loss damages for a period in excess of the three year limitation contained in §3107(b).
The Court of Appeals noted that recovery of work loss benefits under §3135 does not require proof of serious impairment of a body function. Citing the case of Ouellette v Kenealy (Item No. 870), the Court of Appeals held that economic losses under §3135 are recoverable only for actual work loss, and not for lost earning capacity. Based upon an affidavit filed by the plaintiff stating that she had planned to work until age 62, the Court of Appeals held that there existed a question of fact as to whether, but for her injuries, plaintiff would have performed her work until age 62. Based upon this question of fact, the Court reversed summary disposition on this issue and remanded for further proceedings.
