Kreiner Claims Another Victim--Michigan Court of Appeals Rear-Ends Another Critically Injured Plaintiff

The Michigan Court of Appeals continues to use the hideous Kreiner v. Fisher decision to rob injured Michigan citizens of their right to recover for legitimate injuries sustained in auto accidents. The most recent atrocity is a decision called Jones v. Jones (Unpublished per curiam, No: 274627, Nov. 15, 2007). Dr. Evil would be proud.

Since the Kreiner decision came down from the Supreme Court in the summer of 2004, hundreds of plaintiffs have been denied any recovery from the negligent drivers who injured them. No less than 200 of those cases have been taken up on appeal and each time the injured plaintiff has lost. The plaintiffs have only prevailed in 30 such cases.

To illustrate the point, a closer look at Jones v. Jones may be instructive. Cynthia Jones was crossing the street one day when she was hit by a car. The car was being piloted by Sharon Jones (no relation, apparently). Sharon was negligent. The impact caused severe leg fractures that required a very serious open reduction surgery in which stabilizing plates and screws were surgically inserted. All this stabilizing hardware remain there in her leg to the present day and probably always will. (Woe to the poor traveler who finds himself behind Ms. Jones in the airport screening line). She required a wheelchair for an extended period, finally graduated to a walker, and endured months of in-home nursing attendant care to assist her with even the most basic daily needs. She also missed several months of work. She testified in her deposition that she still has pain and problems with standing and walking, even years after the accident.

Cynthia Jones brought suit against the negligent driver to recover for her pain and suffering. Unfortunately, the trial judge granted the defendant's motion for summary disposition and dismissed the case on the ground that, under the Kreiner decision, Cynthia Jones did not suffer a "serious impairment of an important body function." In other words, her injuries were not serious enough to meet the no-fault threshold requirement. She appealed. The Court of Appeals agreed that Cynthia Jones' injuries were not serious enough as a matter of law and affirmed the dismissal. There you have it. Case dismissed. End of story. Like the hundreds of plaintiffs just like her, unlucky enough to be injured through the negligence of others, Cynthia Jones faces the rest of her life with no compensation. The negligent driver gets off free, and Cynthia Jones is left to contemplate her broken body, scars, plates, syndesmotic screws, arthritis and pain. Victims of drunk or negligent drivers are being systematically victimized again by our courts. This is not fair. This is not justice. This is Michigan.

And lest we all forget, this is why we have insurance. To protect ourselves (and those we injure) from our mistakes. We are forced to have the insurance. But to what end? Have your rates gone down? The legislature has promised a fix for the ongoing scandal that is festering quietly, largely unnoticed in the Michigan courts. Let's hope it comes--and soon.

For an excellent discussion of the Kreiner dilemma, see Steven Gursten's article in the December 10, 2007 Lawyer's Weekly. The analysis is spot on.