Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 52297; Published
Judges Danhof, Cavanagh, and Freeman; Unanimous
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 109 Mich App 413; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Liability of Non-Motorist Defendants [§3135]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Legislative Purpose and Intent
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous Opinion by Chief Justice Danhof, the Court of Appeals applied the collateral source rule to a dram shop action thereby prohibiting the dram shop defendants from reducing their liability for medical expenses and economic loss to the extent that such items were paid by the plaintiff’s no-fault insurance carrier. Consistent with the prior holding of the Court of Appeals in Schwark v Lilly (Item No. 218), the court held that the abolition of tort liability in §3135 was not applicable to liability created by the Michigan Dram Shop Act Liability under the Dram Shop Statute does not arise out of the ownership, maintenance or use of a motor vehicle, but rather stems from the unlawful furnishing of liquor to a visibly intoxicated person. In applying the collateral source rule to this kind of liability, the court held that the applicability of the rule was not affected by the fact that no-fault insurance coverage was mandatory as opposed to voluntarily acquired by the injured plaintiff. In ruling that this did not obviate the necessity to apply the collateral source rule, the court stated:
"Nevertheless, premiums were paid for the coverage and the insurance benefits were still obtained from a source wholly independent of and collateral to the defendants. We will not sidestep the collateral source rule on the ground that the insurance was mandatory."
The court reversed the trial court and remanded the case with instructions to permit the plaintiff to introduce evidence of medical expenses and other economic losses without regard to whether or not those damages were paid by no-fault insurance.
