¶1(concurring). I join with the majority in determining that the trial court erred by concluding that Netter’s injuries impaired her general ability to lead a normal life, and, therefore, I agree that summary disposition was correctly granted in favor of Bowman. Accordingly, I would not address the question whether Netter suffered a serious impairment of body function.
272 Mich. App. 289
Netter v. Bowman
Decided September 19, 2006
Michigan Court of Appeals · decided 2006-09-19
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently April 2009
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 2006-09-19
View the full empirical analysis of this case →