Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket #265520; Unpublished
Judges Murphy, O’Connell, and Murray; unanimous; per curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not applicable, Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Entitlement to PIP Benefits: Transportational Function Requirement [3105(1)]
Serious Impairment of Body Function Definition (Kreiner Era - 1996-2010 [3135(7)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous unpublished per curiam opinion decided without oral argument, the Court of Appeals affirmed summary disposition in defendants’ favor, finding the exclusive remedy of a bus passenger who was injured while attempting to recline her seat lies under the No-Fault Act and, therefore, plaintiff’s personal injury tort action is governed by the tort claims restrictions set forth in MCL 500.3135. The plaintiff in this case sought to avoid application of the No-Fault Act claiming that her injury, which occurred when her seat malfunctioned when she attempted to make it recline, did not arise out of the ownership, maintenance of use of a motor vehicle. The Court of Appeals disagreed and affirmed, finding plaintiff was injured because of a defect in the bus while the bus was being used for transportational purposes. In this regard, the court explained:
“In this case, plaintiff was injured while being transported in the bus. She was inside the moving bus, and the bus was within its natural territorial limits, when plaintiff attempted to recline her seat; her use of the bus had not terminated at the time of the accident. Defendants were still using and operating the bus to transport plaintiff when the accident occurred. The accident occurred because of a defect in the bus itself, i.e., a faulty seat. The bus was more than the mere site of the accident and the injury arose out of the use of the bus to transport passengers. We, therefore, conclude that the no-fault act applies in this case.”
