Legal Opinion
Petaja v. Guck
Michigan Court of Appeals
Decided July 18, 1989No. Docket 106973PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Per curiam
Plaintiff seeks recovery for noneconomic damages under Michigan’s no-fault automobile insurance act, MCL 500.3135; MSA 24.13135, for alleged permanent serious disfigurement. Plaintiff appeals as of right from an order granting summary disposition to defendant pursuant to MCR 2.116(0(10). We affirm.
Plaintiff contends that the trial court erred in granting defendant’s motion for summary disposition on the basis that plaintiff’s injury did not constitute a permanent serious disfigurement. We disagree.
A motion for summary disposition under MCR 2.116(0(10) tests whether there is factual support…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- DiFranco v. PickardMichigan Supreme Court · 1986
- Dumas v. Auto Club Ins. Ass'nMichigan Court of Appeals · 1988
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. ReistMichigan Court of Appeals · 1988
- Peterfish v. FrantzMichigan Court of Appeals · 1988
- Dagen v. Hastings Mutual InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1987
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Admiral Insurance v. Columbia Casualty InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1992
- Hutchinson v. Allegan County Board of Road CommissionersMichigan Court of Appeals · 1992
- Minter v. City of Grand RapidsMichigan Court of Appeals · 2007
- Pemberton v. DharmaniMichigan Court of Appeals · 1991
- Jesson v. General Telephone Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1990
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.