Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 44477; Published
Judges MacKenzie, Bashara, and Riley; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 98 Mich App 123; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Nature of Survivor’s Loss Benefits [§3108(1)]
Calculation of Survivor’s Loss Benefits and Maximums [§3108(1)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Legislative Purpose and Intent
CASE SUMMARY:
In a very significant per curiam Opinion, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that the failure of the original survivor's loss section of the statute (§3108) to provide for a cost of living adjustment similar to the cost of living adjustment applicable to wage loss benefits, constitutes an unconstitutional violation of equal protection. In rendering this decision, the Court of Appeals stated:
"The equal-protection test for socioeconomic legislation such as the No-Fault Act is whether the statute is reasonably related to a legitimate legislative objective. . . .The purpose of both §3107 and §3108 is presumably to provide motor vehicle accident victims and their dependents with compensation for lost wages and medical expenses, a perfectly legitimate legislative objective. . . .However, defendant has set forth no possible relation, nor can we postulate one, between that objective and the cost-of-living distinctions. We believe that this deficiency was implicitly recognized by the legislature when it added cost-of-living benefits to §3108 in 1978. Therefore, it was proper for the trial court to declare the original §3108 unconstitutional based on equal protection grounds and to remedy the matter by awarding plaintiff the full benefits that her deceased husband would have received under §3107 had he survived."
Even though this opinion dealt with a significant constitutional question of first impression, the Court ruled that the plaintiff was entitled to receive attorney fees pursuant to §3148 of the no-fault statute.
