Michigan Court of Appeals Considers Multiple Appellate Issues in PIP Case

Although the Court of Appeals decision in Humphries allowed an accident reconstruction expert to refute a biomechanical engineer’s testimony, it is still good practice to retain a biomechanical engineer whenever testimony regarding the force of an automobile accident and causation for specific injuries is needed.

In addition, when evaluating a claim for replacement services, careful cross examination of the service provider, including reviewing all household service forms during the deposition, will best prepare a case for trial.

Finally, even though in Humphries, Covenant was not raised in the trial court, but was still found to apply retroactively, it is still good practice to raise the issue in the trial court, when applicable.

To access the full article: http://bit.ly/2WyNrxE