Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 79549; Published
Judges Wahls, Branson, and Megargle; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 143 Mich App 223; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Allowable Expenses for Rehabilitation [§3107(1)(a)]
General / Miscellaneous [§3157]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this significant per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals held that vocational rehabilitation benefits are covered benefits under the allowable expense provisions of §3107(a) and, thus, are recoverable by an accident victim who needs occupational retraining. The Court rejected the defendant's contention that the word "rehabilitation" in §3107(a) was intended to refer only to medical or physical rehabilitation, but not vocational rehabilitation. The court noted that Attorney General Opinion No. 6129 (Item No. 655) ruled that the term "rehabilitation" should be given its ordinary meaning and thus should be interpreted to include vocational rehabilitation. Furthermore, the court noted that §3157 of the act provides further support for the broad interpretation of rehabilitation in that it specifically refers to an insurer's obligation to pay for "rehabilitative occupational training." Even if that phrase is narrower than "rehabilitation" in §3107(a), the court stated that "§3107(a), as the entitlement section, should not be limited by the cost-control provisions of §3157."
