14 Michigan opinions name it 1 courts 2015–2025 9 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Michigan courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
McCORMICK v. CARRIERgreen2 sentences2025Therefore, the inquiry regarding an important body function is “an inherently subjective inquiry that must be decided on a case-by-case basis, because what may seem to be trivial body function for most people may be subjectively important to some, depending on the relationship of that functions to the person’s life.” Id. “[T]he aggravation or triggering of a preexisting condition can constitute a compensable injury.” Fisher v Blankenship, 286 Mich App 54, 63 ; 777 NW2d 469 (2009). 2024This prong is “an inherently subjective inquiry that must be decided on a case-by-case basis, because what may seem to be a trivial body function for most people may be subjectively important to some, depending on the relationship of that function to the person’s life.” McCormick, 487 Mich at 199 . | 1 | 14 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Fisher v. Blankenship
green
2 sentences2025Therefore, the inquiry regarding an important body function is “an inherently subjective inquiry that must be decided on a case-by-case basis, because what may seem to be trivial body function for most people may be subjectively important to some, depending on the relationship of that functions to the person’s life.” Id. “[T]he aggravation or triggering of a preexisting condition can constitute a compensable injury.” Fisher v Blankenship, 286 Mich App 54, 63 ; 777 NW2d 469 (2009). 2025Therefore, the inquiry regarding an important body function is “an inherently subjective inquiry that must be decided on a case-by-case basis, because what may seem to be trivial body function for most people may be subjectively important to some, depending on the relationship of that functions to the person’s life.” Id. “[T]he aggravation or triggering of a preexisting condition can constitute a compensable injury.” Fisher v Blankenship, 286 Mich App 54, 63 ; 777 NW2d 469 (2009). | 2 | 2022–2025 |
Loutts v. Loutts
green
2 sentences2017Loutts v Loutts, 298 Mich App 21, 23-24 ; 826 NW2d 152 (2012). -4- NW2d 88 (2011) (finding that when the plaintiff’s physician found “muscle spasms, pain, numbness, and restricted range of motion” and that when the plaintiff had a bulging disc that was shown in medical imaging there was a genuine factual dispute on whether the plaintiff suffered an objectively manifested impairment”).2 The second McCormick prong of whether the objectively manifested impairment is of an important body function is “an inherently subjective inquiry” because “[w]hether a body function has great ‘value,’ ‘significa 2017Loutts v Loutts, 298 Mich App 21, 23-24 ; 826 NW2d 152 (2012). -4- NW2d 88 (2011) (finding that when the plaintiff’s physician found “muscle spasms, pain, numbness, and restricted range of motion” and that when the plaintiff had a bulging disc that was shown in medical imaging there was a genuine factual dispute on whether the plaintiff suffered an objectively manifested impairment”).2 The second McCormick prong of whether the objectively manifested impairment is of an important body function is “an inherently subjective inquiry” because “[w]hether a body function has great ‘value,’ ‘significa | 2 | 2017–2017 |
Chouman v. Home Owners Insurance
green
2 sentences2017However, “the spine is an extremely important part of every person’s body.” Abir Chouman, 293 Mich App at 444 . 2017However, “the spine is an extremely important part of every person’s body.” Abir Chouman, 293 Mich App at 444 . | 2 | 2017–2017 |
Chumley v. Chrysler Corp.
green
2 sentences2023Historically, this Court has recognized: “The ability to move one’s back is an important body function.” Chumley v Chrysler Corp, 156 Mich App 474, 481 ; 401 NW2d 879 (1986) (citations omitted).3 In this case, the evidence suggests that the impaired body functions were important to plaintiff. 2023Historically, this Court has recognized: “The ability to move one’s back is an important body function.” Chumley v Chrysler Corp, 156 Mich App 474, 481 ; 401 NW2d 879 (1986) (citations omitted).3 In this case, the evidence suggests that the impaired body functions were important to plaintiff. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Gavino R Piccione v. Lyle a Gillette
green
2 sentences2023Notably, “[t]here is no ‘express temporal requirement as to how long an impairment must last in order to have an effect on the person’s general ability to live his or her normal life.” Piccione v Gillette, 327 Mich App 16, 21 ; 932 NW2d 197 (2019) quoting McCormick, 487 Mich at 203 (quotation marks omitted); see also MCL 500.3135(5)(c). 2023Notably, “[t]here is no ‘express temporal requirement as to how long an impairment must last in order to have an effect on the person’s general ability to live his or her normal life.” Piccione v Gillette, 327 Mich App 16, 21 ; 932 NW2d 197 (2019) quoting McCormick, 487 Mich at 203 (quotation marks omitted); see also MCL 500.3135(5)(c). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.