Legal Opinion
Kreiner v. Fischer
Michigan Court of Appeals
Decided July 14, 2003No. Docket 225640PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ON REMAND
Before: White, P.J., and Murphy and Fitzgerald, JJ. Murphy, J.
This appeal, involving the issue whether plaintiff suffered a “serious impairment of body function,” as defined in MCL 500.3135(7), is once again before us by order of the Michigan Supreme Court, which, in lieu of granting leave to appeal, vacated our previous decision, Kreiner v Fischer, 251 Mich App 513; 651 NW2d 433 (2002), and remanded the matter for further proceedings consistent with the order. 468 Mich 884 (2003). The Supreme Court remand order provided, in pertinent part:
The no-fault act, MCL 500.3135(7), defines…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- In Re MCI Telecommunications ComplaintMichigan Supreme Court · 1999
- Roberts v. Mecosta County General HospitalMichigan Supreme Court · 2002
- Wickens v. Oakwood Healthcare SystemMichigan Supreme Court · 2001
- People v. StoneMichigan Supreme Court · 2001
- Kern v. Blethen-ColuniMichigan Court of Appeals · 2000
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Kreiner v. FischerMichigan Supreme Court · 2004
- Netter v. BowmanMichigan Court of Appeals · 2006
- Straub v. ColletteMichigan Court of Appeals · 2003
- McMullen v. DuddlesDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 2005
- Kreiner v. FischerMichigan Supreme Court · 2004
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.