Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 59907; Published
Judges Bronson, MacKenzie, and Sanborn; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 121 Mich App 208; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Definition of Motor Vehicle (Trailers) [§3101(2)(e)]
Exclusion for Vehicles Considered Parked [§3106(1)]
Exception for Loading / Unloading [§3106(1)(b)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Legislative Purpose and Intent
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals held that a semi-trailer, whether attached to truck cab or free-standing, is a "motor vehicle" under §3101(2)(c) of the No-Fault Act, thus entitling a plaintiff who sustained injuries in the course of unloading such a trailer to recover no-fault benefits. The trailer in question was parked at a loading dock and was not attached to the truck cab at the time of injury. The plaintiff was in the process of exiting said trailer by means of a forklift when he was injured. The injury occurred on the same day the trailer had been detached from the truck cab which provided its power.
The Court rejected defendant's argument that such a trailer loses its status as a "motor vehicle" merely because it is detached from its power source. The specific language of §3101(2)(c) defines "motor vehicle" as a vehicle "including a trailer, operated or designed for operation upon a public highway”….There is no statutory requirement that the trailer be attached to the power source.
In addition, the Court noted that in enacting §3106(b), the legislature clearly contemplated that some injuries involving the process of loading and unloading would be compensable with no-fault benefits. The fact that a trailer is attached or unattached to a cab has no relevance to that intention.
