Watkins v. City Cab Corp.
Michigan Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtP. C. Elliott, J.
This is the kind of fender-bender soft tissue injury, briefly incapacitating with a fast and full recovery, that the Legislature meant to keep out of court by enacting the threshold requirements. However, by using the uncertain phrase "serious impairment of body function”, the no-fault act utterly fails to accomplish that purpose and, ironically, makes auto-accident litigation even more of a crap game.
Any incapacity for a few days or weeks will seem "serious” to one jury while another will find against a plaintiff who has a more extensive impairment „with continuing problems. The…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Advisory Opinion Re Constitutionality of 1972 PA 294Michigan Supreme Court · 1973
- McKendrick v. PetrucciMichigan Court of Appeals · 1976
- Vitale v. DanylakMichigan Court of Appeals · 1977
- Cassidy v. McGovernMichigan Court of Appeals · 1978
- Simonetti v. Rinshed-Mason Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1972
3Cited by15 opinions
- DiFranco v. PickardMichigan Supreme Court · 1986
- Cassidy v. McGovernMichigan Supreme Court · 1982
- Williams v. PayneMichigan Court of Appeals · 1984
- Earls v. HerrickMichigan Court of Appeals · 1981
- Burk v. WarrenMichigan Court of Appeals · 1981
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.