Injured? Contact Sinas Dramis for a free consultation.

   

Mahoney v Pesta; (COA-UNP, 8/13/1987; RB #1073)

Print

Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 92437; Unpublished  
Judges Walsh, Shepherd, and Doctoroff; Unanimous; Per Curiam  
Official Michigan Reporter Citation:  Not Applicable; Link to Opinion alt   


STATUTORY INDEXING:  
Determining Serious Impairment of Body Function as a Matter of Law (DiFranco Era – 1987-1995) [§3135(1)]

TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable    


CASE SUMMARY:  
In this unanimous per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals affirmed a jury no cause in favor of defendant on the issue of serious impairment of body function.

Significantly, the Court of Appeals reviewed the record in this pre-DiFranco jury trial and concluded that reasonable minds could differ as to the issue of serious impairment of body function, and therefore, the trial court was held to have properly denied plaintiff’s motion for a directed verdict. The Court of Appeals did not describe the nature or extent of plaintiff’s injuries in its decision.


Michigan auto accident attorney Stephen Sinas is the lead editor of the appellate case summaries published on this site regarding the Michigan auto insurance law. To learn more about how Stephen Sinas and how the Sinas Dramis Law Firm can help you if you have been injured in a Michigan auto accident, visit SinasDramis.com.

Copyright © 2024  Sinas Dramis Law Firm, George Sinas, Stephen Sinas.
All Rights Reserved.
Login (Publishers Only)

FacebookInstagram