Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket #288753; Unpublished
Judges Whitbeck, Meter, and Fort Hood; unanimous; per curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not applicable, Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
General/Miscellaneous
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous unpublished per curiam opinion, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court judgment of no cause of action which was entered after a jury trial for no-fault PIP benefits, determining that there was a question of fact for the jury regarding whether plaintiff’s injuries were pre-existing.
The plaintiff in this case claimed that she injured her neck and back in a motor vehicle accident. However, an IME physician testified that the plaintiff had complained of pain in her neck and back before the accident and that there was nothing to suggest that the accident changed the complaints in any significant manner. The physician explained that he could not determine whether the pain was causally related to the accident. Based on this testimony, the Court of Appeals determined there was a question of fact regarding whether the plaintiff’s injuries may have been causally related to the accident. In this regard, the court stated:
“Dr. Kirschner testified that Brewster had complaints of pain in her neck and back before the accident and there was nothing to suggest that the accident changed the natural course of these complaints in any significant way. He explained that he was not saying that Brewster did not have complaints of neck and back pain, but rather that there was no reason to believe that any ongoing complaints were causally related to the accident. In light of this testimony, there was a question of fact whether any neck or back injury Brewster may have had was causally related to the accident.”
