Injured? Contact Sinas Dramis for a free consultation.

   

Sherrell v Bugaski; (COA-PUB, 9/21/1984; RB # 802)

Print

Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 72822; Published  
Judges Hood, R. B. Burns, and Everett; Unanimous; Per Curiam  
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 140 Mich App 708; Link to Opinion alt    


STATUTORY INDEXING:  
Serious Impairment of Body Function Definition (Cassidy Era – 1983-1986) [§3135(1)]  
Objective Manifestation Element of Serious Impairment (Cassidy Era – 1983-1986) [§3135(1)]    
Important Body Function Element of Serious Impairment (Cassidy Era – 1983-1986) [§3135(1)]    
General Ability / Normal Life Element of Serious Impairment (Cassidy Era – 1983-1986) [§3135(1)]    
Determining Serious Impairment of Body Function as a Matter of Law (Cassidy Era – 1983-1986) [§3135(1)]

TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable    


CASE SUMMARY:    
In another "serious impairment" decision under Cassidy, this panel unanimously affirmed a trial court decision granting defendant's motion for summary judgment. The court agreed with plaintiff that she had sustained a "permanent back injury that has objective manifestations, i.e., x-rays showing the absence of a normal spinal curvature, and that the injury does impair important body functions. Plaintiff cannot sit for long periods and finds running or jogging painful." However, the court disagreed that plaintiff’s injuries satisfy the threshold requirement for the reason that her impairment was not "serious" within the meaning of the statute. The court stated:

"The injury has not caused a significant impact on plaintiff’s ability to live a normal life. Plaintiff can walk, drive and work and her doctors have never restricted her work or social activities."

[Authors Comment: Earlier in this opinion, the court cited the decision in Braden v Lee (Item No. 725) for the proposition that "the court should apply an objective standard and look to the effect of the injury on the individual's general ability to lead a normal life." This panel's reference to Braden could be a further indication that the "objective manifestation" language in Cassidy refers to the impact on lifestyle rather than underlying organic pathology.]


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