Issue: Under Michigan law, is an insured entitled to loss of income personal protection insurance benefits if he or she insured is in the process of securing a job?
|Area of Law:||Insurance Law|
|Keywords:||Personal protection insurance benefits; Loss of income|
|Cited Statutes:||MCL § 500.310, § 3107a, §§ 3107(b), 3107a,|
“A pretrial motion for summary judgment pursuant to GCR 1963, 117.3 may not be granted unless the court, giving ‘the benefit of any reasonable doubt to the opposing party,’ determines that `there is no genuine issue as to any material fact.'” Michigan Mut Ins Co. v Heatilator Fireplace, Div of Vega Indus, Inc, 422 Mich 148; 366 NW2d 202, 205 (1985) (reversing trial court’s award of summary judgment to defendants) (quoting Rizzo v Kretschmer, 389 Mich 363, 372; 207 NW2d 316, 320 (1973)). “Summary disposition is not appropriate if the facts can support conflicting inferences even when there is no material factual dispute.” Mousa v State Auto Ins Cos, 185 Mich App 293; 460 NW2d 310, 311 (1990).
The No-Fault Act provides: “Personal protection insurance benefits are payable for the following: . . . (b) Work loss consisting of loss of income from work an injured person would have performed during the first 3 years after the date of the accident if he or she had not been injured and expenses not exceeding $20.00 . . . .” MCL § 500.3107 (Supp. 1992). Neither the statute nor the decisions applying it to persons who are injured while in the process of obtaining new employment, so hold. Instead, the injured person is entitled to an opportunity to prove to the jury “that [if] he would have changed jobs and earned a higher income, then he should be entitled to increased work-loss benefits.” Kirksey v Manitoba Pub Ins Corp, 191 Mich App 12, 477 NW2d 442, […]