PLMIhard
Under McCormick v. Carrier (2010), which formulation correctly describes the 'serious impairment of body function' threshold a No-Fault tort plaintiff must meet to recover non-economic damages from the at-fault driver?
AAny objectively manifested injury automatically satisfies the threshold, even if it has no effect on the plaintiff's general ability to lead his or her normal life
BA permanent serious disfigurement only; functional impairments do not qualify
An objectively manifested impairment of an important body function that affects the plaintiff's general ability to lead his or her normal life
DA 60-day disability presumption fixed by statute
Why this is the answer
McCormick v. Carrier (2010) replaced the restrictive Kreiner framework with a three-prong test under MCL 500.3135: an objectively manifested impairment of an important body function that affects the plaintiff's general ability to lead a normal life. The test does not require permanence or a specific duration.
Studying for the MI Personal Lines exam?
This question comes from our PL bank. Take a free practice test — no signup.