Gary Mark McManigal v. George Jan Levosinski ( 2010 )


Menu:
  • Order                                                                       Michigan Supreme Court
    Lansing, Michigan
    October 26, 2010                                                                        Marilyn Kelly,
    Chief Justice
    Michael F. Cavanagh
    Maura D. Corrigan
    138447                                                                            Robert P. Young, Jr.
    Stephen J. Markman
    GARY MARK McMANIGAL,                                                              Diane M. Hathaway
    Plaintiff-Appellant,                                                     Alton Thomas Davis,
    Justices
    v                                                      SC: 138447
    COA: 283030
    Oakland CC: 2007-080823-NI
    GEORGE JAN LEVOSINSKI,
    Defendant-Appellee.
    _____________________________________/
    By order of August 20, 2009, the application for leave to appeal the February 3,
    2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals was held in abeyance pending the decision in
    McCormick v Carrier (Docket No. 136738). On order of the Court, the case having been
    decided on July 31, 2010, 487 Mich ___ (2010), the application is again considered and,
    pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we VACATE the
    judgment of the Court of Appeals, and we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals
    for reconsideration in light of McCormick.
    CORRIGAN, J. (concurring).
    I concur in the order remanding for reconsideration under McCormick v Carrier,
    487 Mich ___ (2010), because the majority opinion in McCormick altered the criteria for
    determining whether an injured plaintiff meets the serious impairment threshold in MCL
    500.3135(7). But I reiterate my disagreement with the McCormick majority’s analysis
    for the reasons expressed in Justice MARKMAN’s dissent in that case, which I joined. I
    continue to conclude that the McCormick majority misinterpreted MCL 500.3135(7), thus
    encouraging litigation that is expressly prohibited by the motor vehicle no-fault insurance
    act and upsetting the Legislature’s clear intent to provide Michigan citizens with timely,
    automatic benefits for injuries sustained in auto accidents while avoiding costly,
    unnecessary litigation.
    2
    YOUNG, J. (concurring).
    Although I recognize that this Court’s decision in McCormick v Carrier, 487 Mich
    ___ (2010), now controls when a person may recover in tort for non-economic loss under
    the no-fault act, I continue to adhere to the position stated in Justice MARKMAN’s
    dissenting opinion in that case, which I joined.
    I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the
    foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.
    October 26, 2010                    _________________________________________
    d1018                                                                Clerk
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 138447

Filed Date: 10/26/2010

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014