Lewis v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

Defendant’s application for leave to appeal asks that we resolve a conflict between panels of the Court of Appeals on the meaning of "total and irrecoverable loss of sight of one eye”1 in an insurance contract. In Sump v St Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co, 21 Mich App 160; 175 NW2d 44 (1970), Sidney Sump suffered a reduction in vision in the left eye, correctable to 20/200. The Court of Appeals refused to equate "entire loss of sight” with loss of "useful sight” or "practical use”:

"If it appears that the insured still has some sight in the injured eye, he is not entitled to recover under a…