Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 203180; Published
Judges Hoekstra, Doctoroff, and O'Connell; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 236 Mich App 204; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Exclusion for Parked Vehicles Covered by Workers Comp [§3106(2)]
Standards for Deductibility of State and Federal Governmental Benefits [§3109(1)]
Federal Workers Compensation Benefits [§3109(1)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Federal Workers Compensation Benefits
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous per curiam published Opinion, the Court of Appeals held that plaintiff was not precluded from receiving no-fault benefits by the parked vehicle exception contained in section 3106(2) for injuries arising out of the use of a parked vehicle where workers' compensation benefits or benefits under a similar federal law are available to an employee who sustains injury in the course of his employment, while loading, unloading or doing mechanical work on a vehicle. The court held that in this case, because plaintiff had to repay his FECA (Federal Employees Compensation Act) benefits from his tort recovery, these federal payments are not “benefits” available to the employee within the meaning of section 3106(2), and his no-fault insurance company therefore improperly denied his claim for no-fault first-party benefits.
Plaintiff was injured while working as a mail dispatcher for the United States Postal Service. He injured his back when he lifted the rear door of defendant's semi-truck which was not properly working or maintained. Defendant was an independent contractor hired by the postal service to deliver mail.
Plaintiff claimed personal injury protection benefits with his automobile insurance carrier, which were denied under section 3106(2)(a) which would preclude the receipt of no-fault benefits where the injury arises out of the ownership, operation, maintenance, or use of a parked vehicle as a motor vehicle, if benefits under workers' compensation or under a similar law of another state, or under a similar federal law are available to an employee who sustains the injury in the course of his or her employment while loading, unloading or doing mechanical work on a vehicle.
After denial of his first-party benefits, plaintiff brought an action against the owner of the delivery company and truck, for failing to maintain the truck, thus resulting in his injuries. Plaintiff sought to avoid the serious impairment of body function threshold contained in section 3135(1) by alleging that his action was a general negligence action, thereby allowing him to pursue all of his non-economic damages without regard to the serious impairment threshold, and to also claim economic damages.
The Court of Appeals held that the trial court incorrectly allowed plaintiff to pursue his general negligence claim. The court held that this case should have been decided under the no-fault statute with its attendant limitations on third-party liability. The court rejected plaintiff’s argument that the parked vehicle provisions of section 3106 removed this case from the No-Fault Act. The court found that plaintiff’s personal insurer could not escape its obligation to pay benefits to the plaintiff. The fact that the federal government had a lien entitling it to reimbursement of its wage benefit and medical expense benefits out of plaintiff s tort recovery did not create an inequity, because plaintiff in fact was entitled to recover his no-fault benefits under section 3106. The court held that in cases where a plaintiff must repay his federal benefits from his tort recovery, the Michigan Supreme Court has held that the federal payments are not "benefits available" for purposes of section 3106(2), and therefore, it is improper for the no-fault insurer to deny such benefits. Sibley v DAIIE, 431 Mich 164 (1988) (Item No. 1146). To the extent that plaintiff must repay his federal benefits from his tort recovery, they are not "benefits available" for purposes of section 3106(2), and therefore, the no-fault insurer must pay personal protection benefits to the extent restitution is required.
