The long-awaited Michigan Supreme Court hearing on McCormick v. Carrier was Tuesday.  McCormick is the case that will hopefully change Michigan’s long-broken auto threshold law, Kreiner v. Fischer — and restore the rights of injured auto accident victims.

Kreiner is a 2004 Michigan Supreme Court decision that interpreted the no-fault act’s “serious impairment of body function” statute. It establishes the precondition plaintiffs must meet before they can sue for non-economic damages in such a way that many people who suffer serious injuries and who miss months from work, lose their right to bring car accident claims.

When Susan Al-Maliki was seriously injured in a rear-end car accident, she never thought it would be a Wayne County Circuit Court judge in Detroit who would pose the greatest obstacle to her pain and suffering claim reaching a jury.

Without warning – and without providing her an opportunity to respond – Judge Warfield Moore Jr. dismissed Ms. Al-Maliki’s auto-tort lawsuit for a reason that he alone chose to focus on.

Car Accident Lawyer Highlights Court Trend Requiring Permanent Injuries for Plaintiffs to Win

I’d like to remind my fellow car accident lawyers that judges in Michigan are forgetting injuries do not need to be permanent to be serious. This is exemplified in O’Keefe v. Auto Club, an unpublished Michigan Court of Appeals win for an auto accident victim who sustained neck and back injuries.

I make note of it because although the plaintiff wins, this case perpetuates the problem of seemingly requiring that an impairment is permanent in order for it to qualify as a serious impairment of body function. In O’Keefe, the fact that saves the day for the plaintiff’s claim is that her residual impairments “appear to be permanent.”

15 Months Off Work and Unable to Walk From Personal Injuries Is Not “Serious Enough”

If there’s one truth to emerge from the horrifically flawed Michigan Supreme Court ruling in Kreiner v. Fischer, a case that has doomed thousands of auto accident victims in Michigan, it is this:

The word “normal” doesn’t mean what you think it does.

At least not for innocent Michigan residents who have suffered serious personal injury from car accidents and must now follow Alice into Wonderland.  Linda Berishaj has had to learn that lesson the hard way.

Car Accident Lawyer Predicts Kreiner Change

Recently, I’ve been writing about McCormick v. Carrier, the Michigan Supreme Court case that car accident attorneys and judges are hoping will finally reverse Kreiner v. Fischer. On Monday, Michigan Lawyers Weekly wrote a story on the possibilities McCormick could bring, and interviewed me as an expert. I believe if McCormick prevails, auto accident victims who have had their rights ravaged by Kriener for the past four years will finally have a chance.

Here’s the story as it appeared in the newspaper:

End of an era?
‘McCormick v. Carrier’ challenges ‘Kreiner’
By Carol Lundberg

Auto accident attorney reports four Michigan Supreme Court cases in abeyance pending McCormick

This week I wrote about McCormick v. Carrier, the auto accident case that Michigan auto accident attorneys and judges are hoping will finally reverse Kreiner v. Fischer. On August 20, the Michigan Supreme Court granted the motion for reconsideration in McCormick as well as leave to appeal.

I would like to inform my fellow auto accident attorneys that there are four additional cases being held in abeyance:

* Mimoza Neci and Vera Neci v. Vannice Arrin Steel, Jr., Clara Jones and Anita Terry, and Citizens Insurance Company of America

I’ve received a heartfelt response to my recent blog, Michigan’s Auto Accident Law Protects Drunk Drivers, Not Accident Victims, from the mother of the actual car accident victim in the Michigan Court of  Appeals case Wayne Cottrill v. Craig Kenneth Senter (No. 285216).

In Cottrill v. Senter, a drunk driver with a .30 blood alcohol level slammed head-on into a car carrying an 11-year-old boy named Anthony. Anthony sustained multiple personal injuries, including fractures to his foot, wrist, hand and ribs. He missed months from school and had to drop out of the many activities he participated in before the car crash, like football. But thanks to Michigan’s car accident law Kreiner v. Fischer, Senter didn’t face any civil consequences for his actions. Unfortunately, as a personal injury lawyer, I’ve seen many legitimate auto accident cases thrown out of court because of Kreiner. Meanwhile, many honest accident victims continue to suffer.

A drunk driver with a .30 blood alcohol level slams head-on into the oncoming car of an 11-year-old boy.  The drunk driver walks away. The boy, Anthony, doesn’t walk away at all.  Anthony isn’t able to walk again for at least another month after the car accident, due to multiple fractures to his foot, wrist, hand and ribs. He also loses consciousness and requires in-home nursing care while recovering from his injuries. He misses two more months from school, and has to drop out of the many activities he participated in before the car crash, such as playing on the football team.

A Flow Chart Guide to Michigan’s Car Accident Threshold Law

Last week, when I blogged about the Michigan Supreme Court’s 2004 Kreiner v. Fischer decision — the case that has ravaged the rights of car accident and truck accident victims in Michigan — I received a request asking if I could specifically explain Kreiner, which sets forth Michigan’s auto accident threshold law. Here’s a flow chart I use when leading seminars for Michigan lawyers on the state’s automobile accident threshold law, and when teaching the third-party no-fault class at Cooley Law School every year with Professor Borin. You can click on it to view an enlarged version.

On Tuesday, I posted an open letter that my Michigan Auto Law partner Bobby Raitt wrote last year, during his presidency of the Michigan Trial Lawyers Association. Bob asked his fellow Michigan personal injury lawyers whether they can “stand the rain”— the “rain” being the dismal state of consumer rights and personal injury law in Michigan following years of the Engler-appointed “Majority of Four” Court’s dismantling of safeguards, precedent and binding stare decisis designed to protect people. These arch-conservative, activist justices have especially wreaked havoc on victims of car accidents and truck accidents in Michigan with the Kreiner v. Fischer decision.