Injured? Contact Sinas Dramis for a free consultation.


Cloum v Progressive Michigan Insurance Company; (COA-UNP, 3/18/2004, RB #2446)


Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 245071; Unpublished    
Judges Zahra, Saad, and Schuette; unanimous; per curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not applicable, Link to Opinion

Entitlement to PIP Benefits: Arising Out of / Causation Requirement [3105(1)] 

Not applicable 

In this unanimous unpublished per curiam opinion, the Court of Appeals held that plaintiff was entitled to receive PIP benefits under the provisions of §3105 of the No-Fault Act as a consequence of having received an eye injury when a truck tire he was working on exploded.

Plaintiff claimed he was entitled to PIP benefits under §3105 of the No-Fault Act, asserting he sustained his injury while performing maintenance work on a motor vehicle. The provisions of §3105 allow for personal protection insurance benefits for accidental bodily injury arising out of the “ownership, operation, maintenance or use of a motor vehicle as a motor vehicle.”

The Court of Appeals relied on the Supreme Court decision in Miller v Auto-Owners Insurance Company, 411 Mich 633; 309 NW2d 544 (1981), which held that where an injury arises out of the maintenance of a parked vehicle, a claimant may recover under MCL 500.3105(1) without regard to the parked vehicle provisions in MCL 500.3106. Therefore, plaintiff was entitled to no-fault benefits.

Lansing car accident lawyer 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

Copyright © 2022 Sinas Dramis Law Firm, George Sinas, Stephen Sinas.
All Rights Reserved.
Login (Publishers Only)