Negligence action arising from a garage-door incident; “Threshold injury” under MCL 500.3135; Applicability of the statute

The court concluded that because “plaintiffs failed to respond to defendants’ motion for summary disposition with documentary evidence supporting [plaintiff-]Tammy’s claim that [defendant-]Kindlund caused her left shoulder injury when he dropped a garage door on her shoulder, the trial court properly granted defendants’ motion under MCR 2.116(C)(10).” It also held that because “the statutory language plainly limits MCL 500.3135 to injuries caused by the ownership, maintenance, or use of a motor vehicle, the trial court properly determined that it” did not apply here. Tammy argued “that she sustained an injury to her left shoulder when Kindlund dropped a garage door on her shoulder while attempting to repair the garage door. Although plaintiffs’ complaint does not reference an incident involving a garage door, we note that an injury caused by a dropped garage door could, possibly, support a negligence claim. The trial court properly determined, however, that Tammy failed to provide any documentary evidence supporting her claim.” In responding to defendants’ summary disposition motion, “plaintiffs cited and attached text messages between Kindlund and Tammy. In the text messages, Tammy asserted that she did not feel well on the day Kindlund attempted to fix the garage door, she needed to go to the hospital, and she was diagnosed with a left rotator-cuff injury. Tammy did not mention a garage door, let alone indicate that Kindlund dropped a garage door on her, nor did she suggest that [he] caused her rotator-cuff injury.” Plaintiffs also attached medical records of Tammy’s 3/23 “MRI of both of her shoulders, indicating that rotator-cuff disorder was suspected regarding both shoulders. The records also stated ‘unspecified chronicity’ regarding Tammy’s left shoulder injury rather than indicating that [her] pain began when a garage door was dropped on her. During oral argument on defendants’ motion, the trial court asked plaintiffs whether they had medical records indicating that Tammy’s left shoulder injury was causally connected to Kindlund dropping a garage door on her shoulder, but plaintiffs were unable to identify any such evidence.” Tammy next argued “that the ‘serious impairment of body function’ standard set forth MCL 500.3135” applied as to her injuries, relying on the preamble of the Insurance Code. While the preamble may generally aid in understanding a provision, “if a provision is unambiguous, the language of the preamble does not control its meaning. MCL 500.3135(1) provides that ‘[a] person remains subject to tort liability for noneconomic loss caused by his or her ownership, maintenance, or use of a motor vehicle only if the injured person has suffered death, serious impairment of body function, or permanent serious disfigurement.’” Affirmed.