Minter v. City of Grand Rapids
Michigan Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtDavis, J.
Flaintiff appeals as of right an order granting summary disposition to defendants pursuant to MCR 2.116(0(10). The trial court determined that plaintiff did not suffer either a serious impairment of *223body function or a permanent serious disfigurement, so her claim was barred by the no-fault insurance act, MCL 500.3101 et seq. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.
Defendant Wetzel is a police officer employed by defendant city of Grand Rapids. On August 15, 2002, at approximately 5:00 p.m., he was in a police cruiser responding to a request for assistance from another officer. He…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Maiden v. RozwoodMichigan Supreme Court · 1999
- Moll v. Abbott LaboratoriesMichigan Supreme Court · 1993
- Kreiner v. FischerMichigan Supreme Court · 2004
- Kern v. Blethen-ColuniMichigan Court of Appeals · 2000
- Stephens v. DixonMichigan Supreme Court · 1995
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Fisher v. BlankenshipMichigan Court of Appeals · 2009
- Fisher v. BlankenshipMichigan Court of Appeals · 2009
- Minter v. City of Grand RapidsMichigan Court of Appeals · 2007
- Premo v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2008
- White v. Taylor Distributing Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 2007
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.