Semi driver possibly fell asleep - struck stopped vehicle...Michigan's weird laws.

[wonka]

What is the name of your state? Michigan

Well there is construction on I-94 eastbound, and all traffic merges into the right lane. Well, about a mile before the cones even started everyone was merged into the right lane. As I slowed down to stop with all of the cars in front of me, I looked in the rear-view mirror and saw a semi that was not slowing down. Traffic was stopped and I was only about a car length away from the vehicle in front of me so I turned the wheel to to the right to prevent getting pancaked between the semi and the car in front of me.

The semi driver told the officers who took the report that he was trying to reach his cell phone which had landed on the floor. He did not even touch the breaks before hitting my vehicle. I don't have a copy of the police report yet - but I talked to the officer which did the report and he indicated that the driver of the semi was cited for something to the tone of failure to stop within the assured, clear distance ahead.

Well the vehicle was thrown off the road about 40 yards or so from the site of impact. Most of the damage was done to the driver's side, in fact the trunk lid struck me in the head - there is no trunk or back seat remaining on the driver's side. Luckily I had just dropped off my 1.5 year old daughter at her grandmother's house, because while the car seat was in the middle, the vehicle was crushed enough on the driver's side to pin the car seat to the passenger front seat.

[URL]http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/8720/backfullview15in.jpg[/URL]
[URL]http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/8329/backfullview28qs.jpg[/URL]
[URL]http://img49.imageshack.us/img49/8317/trunklid1vb.jpg[/URL]
[URL]http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/7994/sideview5mv.jpg[/URL]
[URL]http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/4001/carseat28xm.jpg[/URL]
[URL]http://img49.imageshack.us/img49/9640/backzoom8wb.jpg[/URL]

Immediately after the accident I tried my best to calm down my girlfriend who was in the passenger seat, because the car is actually hers. Since the driver's side was so bad, I had to crawl over the center console, but I passed out for a few seconds as I was climbing out. I was unable to speak normally for quite a while. Stuttering and inability to find the words for things.

When an ambulance arrived, they put on a neck brace then strapped me to a board and away I went. They were worried about neck and head trauma, so after arriving at the hospital they did a CT scan of my head and neck, and X-rays of my spine. There looks to be a small fracture on one of the cervical vertebra, other then that no significant damage. I was, and still am, in quite a lot of pain - I was kept overnight at the hospital for observation and pain management. While I am home now, I am still experiencing significant pain in my back, neck, shoulders, and head.

I am wondering what the deal is with Michigan's "no fault" laws and what options do I have? The officer told me on the phone that the semi driver was absolutely at fault, so I am wondering if there is a case here. After I got out of the hospital, I gave my digital camera and camcorder to a friend to go and take pictures and video of the vehicle before the insurance company takes it away. Needless to say the car was totalled.

Thank you all for your time and consideration in this matter. Take care.

What is the name of your state? Michigan

 

[justalayman]

Here is a weblink that gives a pretty good and simple explanation.
http://www.iiminfo.org/consumer/autos.aspx

That accident was good for $500 to you from the trucker's insurance. The rest is on you or your insurance.

Glad to hear the amount of vehicular damage is not indicative of the personal injuries. What a mess.

 

[wonka]

So lost wages and such is all on her insurance company? This is quite odd. I wouldn't seem that her insurance would be willing to cover things like pain and such. I am not looking to make this a huge deal, but it just seems odd that Michigan has these laws - and then the sheriff who filed the report tells me that he was no doubt at fault.

Like I said, I am not trying to cause a lot of problems - but my back and neck hurt considerably so I doubt that I will be able to get into work in the next week. If there are problems when dealing with her insurance company, can a civil case be made against the driver or his company? Or is that the point of MI's no fault laws - to prevent any such action.

 

[justalayman]

There are certain exceptions where a suit is possible as noted in this pdf under residual liability

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/cis_ofis_ip202_25083_7.pdf
as well there a a few other links in this link that may answer some questions as well.


http://www.michigan.gov/cis/0,1607,7-154-10555_13222_13224---,00.html

 

[wonka]

In that pdf you directed me to it states:

3. Residual Liability Insurance - Bodily Injury and Property Damage
The no-fault law protects insured persons from being sued as a result of an auto accident except in certain special situations. In general, you can only be sued:
(a) if you cause an accident in Michigan in which someone is killed, seriously injured, or permanently disfigured;
(b) if you are involved in an accident in Michigan with a non-resident who is an occupant of a motor vehicle not registered in Michigan;
(c) if you are involved in an accident in another state; or
(d) for up to $500 if you are 50% or more at fault in an accident which causes damages to another person’s car which are not covered by insurance.

So if the semi-truck driver is not from Michigan, then I am going to assume that it opens up the possibility of suing for negligence. Beyond what he admitted to the officer, we also have witnesses that stated he never hit the breaks before impact. In addition to the witnesses that were traveling the same direction, there were other semi truck drivers on the road who were going the opposite direction that stated that he was told over the radio to slow down when he was still a mile or so away. So he had advance warning of the back-up.

Even if he does live in and carry insurance in Michigan, that pdf also states:

Your required minimum coverage no-fault policy will pay up to certain amounts if you are found legally responsible. Although you may purchase additional coverage with higher limits, the minimum coverage offers:

• Up to $20,000 for a person who is hurt or killed in an accident,
• Up to $40,000 for each accident if several people are hurt or killed.

Certainly there is enough in the minimum coverage to cover the damages that I might pursue. The officer told me he was found to be completely at fault, so in this case would I now have to have an attorney contact his insurance company to make a case of his negligence?

Michigan is a weird state.

 

[wonka]

But does the insurance company which covers the vehicle I was driving take care of the lost wages, pain and suffering, etc. at first??

Also, the no-fault guidelines state:

You may be sued because of a serious accident. If this happens, your no-fault policy will pay up to the amounts shown in the residual liability section.

So who designates what is a serious accident?

 

[justalayman]

At this point, you should surely know if the driver and the vehicle is from out of state.

The second part you quote is also from the residual insurance section. It speaks to the Michigan driver, not the out of state driver in Michigan. The coverage you quoted is if you are at fault. It would also apply inversely to the driver if he is a Mi driver. So it may apply to them IF one of the exceptions listed above that apply. Notice though that it only applies if their is "serious" injury. I do not know the definition they apply to "serious".

Basically, as I see it, since you are a Mi driver in a MI car, you cannot sue for more than $500 unless it is classified as a serious injury.

The girlfriends insurance' PIP is what you will claim against for your losses and injuries , again, unless it is classified as a "serious" injury.

 

[justalayman]

http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=6231

this link addresses the definition of "serious". It would seem you probably will not be included in this. Al;though the definition seems to be still undefined to a certain extent.

 

[wonka]

I am going to pick up the police report tomorrow. Then I will know if he is from out of state. But the question that remains is if he is from michigan, what is considered a serious accident. I am on 40mg oxycontin every 12 hours right now for pain.

If another CT scan on Monday shows that I have a fractured facet on one of my cervical vertebra, would that make it serious. It's hard to know what the distinction is for when an accident becomes serious.

The trunk lid hit the back of my head, but luckily did not crack the skull. If it had been 5 inches to the left, the corner of the trunk lid would have hit my skull and I would have suffered serious head trauma. As it was, the head trauma was just a concussion - but for 5-6 hours after the accident I could not speak properly. At first I was unable to form sentences, as that got better I had stuttering problems for the next few hours. They had to keep me in the hospital for observation and to administer strong enough pain meds to combat the intense headaches I was experiencing. I was only able to nod off for minutes at a time due to the pain. So, is that considered serious??

EDIT: Just saw your post with the link, but I guess I won't know if it is serious unless my injury is "objectively manifested", and that it interferes with my "general ability to lead a normal life" (quoted from text).

 

[wonka]

On that page it also states:

In DiFranco v Pickard (427 Mich 32), the Court overturned Cassidy in a four-to-three decision. It ruled that whether an injury constituted a serious impairment of body function was a question for the jury unless reasonable minds could not disagree about the issue. It rejected the "objectively manifested" and "general ability to lead a normal life" criteria and essentially stated that all relevant factors could be considered to determine whether an injury satisfied the threshold. The clear implication was that soft tissue injuries for which there existed no evidence of physical damage might nonetheless satisfy the tort threshold. The court based this decision largely on the argument that the legislature had not intended to impose a substantial barrier to recovery for noneconomic loss when it enacted no-fault.

Therefore, it is up to a jury to decide what is serious, correct?

 

[justalayman]

I have found no other info concerning the definition of serious. I would speak with the girlfriends insurance co for their input. They are liable for your injuries as is unless tort threshold can be surpassed. If they can get out of paying, they probably would like to so they have a vested interest in you being able to sue.

to your last post; I would think there may be pre-set hurdles to qualify to some extent. The entire idea of this no-fuault thing was meant to limit costs. If they would allow every accident to reach the courts, it would negate the benefits of the plan.

 

[wonka]

Thank you so much for your help thus far. If anyone else has anything to chime in, please don't hesitate. These forums are great - a real tool to help someone learn what they need to know in situations like this. I now have a much better understanding of no-fault and how to proceed.

When I get the police report, I will come back and post if he was from Michigan or not. His semi was a daycab, meaning that he had no sleeper attached - so that could indicate that he is from the area. On the other hand, the accident happened only 1.5 hours from Chicago, so it is possible he might just run short routes on a daily basis. I will know more tomorrow.