Court Opinion

ID: 9728541
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 14:10:46.597093+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:25:23.280274
License: Public Domain

M. F. Cavanagh, J.,
(dissenting). I am in agreement with my brother that this case involves the type of injury which the Legislature intended to keep out of court by enacting the threshold requirements of the no-fault act. However, until the uncertain phrase "serious impairment of body function” is more clearly defined, either by our Supreme Court or preferably our Legislature, I am persuaded that the threshold determination should *451be left to the trier of fact, except in those cases referred to in Watkins v City Cab Corp, 97 Mich App 723; 296 NW2d 162 (1980), at the outermost limits of the spectrum. The injuries in this case fall in between, and accordingly, I would reverse.