 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Fryman v. State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance Co.8/27/2002
hich was extremely dangerous. Though we have no reason to believe that the police officer was driving unsafely, he purposefully undertook steps to minimize the risk the fleeing thief posed to other drivers by slowing as he approached the intersection. This effort, however, failed when the catastrophic accident happened while the thief was fleeing the officer.
Clearly, the thief could have chosen to wait for the light just as Fryman could have chosen not to pass the van at the time she actually did so. However, in both instances, the insured vehicle was involved in the accident because it affected the other driver's conduct; the officer's presence made the thief flee and the van's position on the road misled Fryman into thinking it was safe to pass.
Under the circumstances of this case, and considering Turner, the trial court correctly interpreted and applied the statute when it concluded that the van was "involved in the accident." Accordingly, the trial court did not err in denying defendant's motion for summary disposition and entering judgment in Fryman's favor.
Affirmed.
William C. Whitbeck
Richard A. Bandstra
Michael J. Talbot
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Michigan Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|