Michigan Supreme Court Sets New Standard For Injury Lawsuits: Car Accident Victims Have Second Chance
Auto accident attorney explains how McCormick v. Carrier restores the rights of personal injury victims pursuing pain and suffering cases
Michigan Supreme Court Sets New Standard for Injury Lawsuits: Car Accident Victims have Second Chance
- Presented by: Steven M. Gursten, auto accident attorney, Michigan Auto Law partner
- Description: Hundreds of seriously injured Michigan car accident victims who were told they do not have pain and suffering cases, now have a second chance with a new Michigan Supreme Court ruling called McCormick v. Carrier. The court has thrown out the 2004 decision called Kreiner v. Fischer – which set a very difficult standard for accident victims to bring personal injury lawsuits – and now opened the door for people who seek compensation after being injured to have a fair chance in court.In this video, auto accident attorney Steve Gursten explains the effects McCormick v. Carrier will have on car and truck accident victims. The Michigan Supreme Court said it was too strict in 2004, when it interpreted Michigan law on the issue of “serious impairment of body function” in Kreiner, he said. Now the court says a person can qualify for pain and suffering damages if his or her normal life is affected, not destroyed, as was previously required.
- Length: 2 minutes, 6 seconds
Video Transcript
Hi my name is Steven Gursten, I’m an auto accident attorney at Michigan Auto Law, and I have some exciting news. On August 1, 2010, the Michigan Supreme Court came down with a new case called McCormick v. Carrier that is really important because it restores important legal rights to hundreds, and potentially thousands of people who’ve been injured in car accidents, who have been completely innocent, seriously injured, and told by attorneys in Michigan that they did not have a case, because their injuries are not serious enough. And what this new case did, is it returned our law in Michigan to the way the Legislature intended when they enacted our law.
And they (the Michigan Supreme Court) returned our law to a more common sense approach that says hey, if you’ve suffered a serious injury like a fracture, or a herniated disc, or a surgery; and you’ve missed weeks from work or months from work, that now will be sufficient. You don’t need a completely altered life like you did before under our old law of Kreiner v. Fischer. And that now it’s enough to have sufficient lifestyle impact, where again, a serious injury and impact on your normal life, and a return to common sense will be enough.
So for the people who have been seriously injured through no fault of their own and told they don’t have a case because they haven’t missed six months from work or a year from work, and had major catastrophic injuries, thankfully, that’s no longer our law in Michigan. If you have questions, or if you’ve been injured in a car accident and it wasn’t your fault, and you’re still suffering pain and having problems with your injuries, feel free to call us. We’re happy to discuss your legal rights and explain how your rights have been restored after yesterday’s court case of McCormick v. Carrier.
More information on McCormick v. Carrier
The 4-3 Michigan Supreme Court opinion on McCormick v. Carrier was released on August 1, 2010. The case stems from Flint, Michigan, in Genesee County: Rodney McCormick suffered an ankle injury when he was run over by a truck while at work. Lower courts had ruled against him, noting that he still had a job at the same pay and was living a normal life. With the new law, Rodney McCormick has the right to pursue pain and suffering damages stemming from his truck accident.
If you were seriously injured in a car crash in Michigan and told you did not have a case before August 1, 2009, you may have a second chance. Call Michigan Auto Law at (800) 968-1001 to speak with an auto accident attorney free of charge.
