Case Name: COOPER v. CURRIGAN
Court: Michigan Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1975-03-11
Citations: 59 Mich. App. 354
Docket Number: Docket No. 18886
Parties: COOPER v CURRIGAN
Judges: Before: D. E. Holbrook, P. J., and R. B. Burns and Van Valkenburg, JJ.
Reporter: Michigan appeals reports; cases decided in the Michigan Court of Appeals.
Volume: 59
Pages: 354–365

Head Matter:
COOPER v CURRIGAN
Opinion op the Court
1. Automobiles — Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund — Amount Payable — Sickness and Accident Benefits — Deductions.
Benefits received by an accident victim from his employer in the nature of sickness and accident benefits for a period of time during which he was unable to work because of his injuries are deductible from the amount payable by the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund where the Fund is liable for payment of a judgment obtained by the victim against the negligent tortfeasor.
Dissent by D. E. Holbrook, P. J.
2. Automobiles — Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Act — Remedial Nature — Construction.
The purpose of the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Act was to provide a remedy for those victims of accidents who normally would receive no compensation for their injuries because of uncollectibility from a guilty tortfeasor; the act is remedial and is to be liberally construed (MCLA 257.1101 ét seq.).
3. Automobiles — Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund — Sickness and Accident Benefits — Constitutional Law — Classifications.
Denial of full recovery from the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund to claimants who also receive sickness and accident beneñts from other sources, while allowing full recovery to those claimants receiving life, hospital, and medical insurance payments creates a classiñcation which is without the force of compelling logic and which is unconstitutionally discriminatory.
References for Points in Headnotes
[1-3, 5] 7 Am Jur 2d, Automobile Insurance §§ 135-138.
Rights and liabilities under "uninsured motorists” coverage. 79 ALR2d 1252.
Unsatisfied claim and judgment statutes: validity and construction of provisions for deduction from awards of sums collectible by claimant from other sources. 7 ALR3d 836.
Uninsured motorist coverage: validity and effect of policy provision purporting to reduce coverage by amount paid under workmen’s compensation law. 24 ALR3d 1369.
[4] 73 Am Jur 2d, Statutes § 254.
4. Statutes — Construction—Constitutional Law.
A statute should be construed so as to bring it within the Constitution if it can be reasonably done.
5. Automobiles — Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund — Amount Payable — Judgment—Sickness and Accident Benefits.
Sickness and accident beneñts paid to an injured accident victim by his employer pursuant to an employment contract are not in partial discharge of a claim or judgment against the negligent tortfeasor, and thus are not deductible from the amount of a judgment which is payable by the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund (MCLA 257.1122[2], 257.1123[2]).
Appeal from Ingham, James T. Kallman, J.
Submitted Division 2 December 2, 1974, at Lansing.
(Docket No. 18886).
Decided March 11, 1975.
Leave to appeal denied, 394 Mich 786.
Complaint by David J. and Wilma J. Cooper against David L. Currigan for damages for injuries received in an automobile accident. The Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund intervened as a defendant. Judgment for plaintiffs. The Accident Claims Fund appeals the order compelling it to pay the full amount of the judgment.
Reversed.
Abood, Abood & Abood, P. C, for plaintiffs.
Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, and Joseph B. Bilitzke and Paul J. Zimmer, Assistants Attorney General, for the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund.
Before: D. E. Holbrook, P. J., and R. B. Burns and Van Valkenburg, JJ.
Former circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment pursuant to Const Í963, art 6, § 23 as amended in 1968.

Opinion:
R. B. Burns, J.
James Cooper received a personal injury judgment against David Currigan, an uninsured motorist. He was unable to work for a period of time and, pursuant to his employment contract, Mr. Cooper received $1,428 from his employer in the nature of sickness and accident benefits. As to that amount, intervening defendant Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund resisted payment of the judgment. The trial court held that the Fund was required to pay the full amount of the judgment. The Fund appeals.
Section 22(2) of the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Act [MCLA 257.1122(2); MSA 9.2822(2)] reads in pertinent part:
"No payment shall be made out of the fund in respect to a judgment for damages of any amount paid or payable by any other person by reason of the existence of any policy, contract, agreement or arrangement, providing for the payment of compensation, indemnity or other benefits."
Plaintiffs' corporate employer is a "person" within the terms of the Act, MCLA 257.1102(e); MSA 9.2802(e). The only significant question is whether the sickness and accident benefits are of the sort which would relieve the Fund of the liability to the extent of $1,428. We hold that they are.
Benefits recovered by an accident victim from his own insurer are deductible. Green v Blicharski, 32 Mich App 15; 188 NW2d 113 (1971). Much like insurance benefits, the Fund in this case is allowed by statute to avail itself of coverage purchased by the tort victim himself either directly or indirectly. Such is the clear legislative mandate.
The legislative intent is clear. So is the language of the statute. The benefits here in issue are "compensation, indemnity or other benefits" provided pursuant to "any policy, contract, agreement or arrangement".
Reversed.
Van Valkenburg, J., concurred.