DOROTHY MINTER V CITY OF GRAND RAPIDS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
DOROTHY MINTER,
FOR PUBLICATION
April 12, 2007
9:00 a.m.
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v
No. 273017
Kent Circuit Court
LC No. 03-005719-NI
CITY OF GRAND RAPIDS and JOHN
EDWARD-RHEEM WETZEL,
Defendants-Appellees.
Official Reported Version
Before: O'Connell, P.J., and Murray and Davis, JJ.
O'CONNELL, P.J. (concurring).
I write separately to address the scars above plaintiff 's right eye.
Plaintiff, a 67-year-old senior citizen, was lawfully crossing the street when a 4,000pound police cruiser collided with her, sending her feet straight up in the air and tossing her body
onto the pavement to the right of the moving patrol car. The pavement tore the skin above her
right eye, and the cut bled profusely. Plaintiff 's shoes were found in the road 15 feet from the
point of impact, and the cruiser's momentum carried it forward nine feet before it could stop.1
The police officer immediately called for an ambulance and began administering first aid.
Plaintiff suffered numerous injuries, including the aches and pains one would expect from being
struck by a fully equipped, two-ton police car going between 15 and 20 miles an hour. She
suffered a broken toe and a cervical strain. She was also treated for a closed head injury and the
laceration on her head. Emergency room personnel described the laceration as "a rather large
forehead laceration, . . . which is T-shaped over the right eye." It required numerous stitches2 to
close, and its resultant scar is approximately 13 millimeters in length with a "complex of scars"
1
All parties agree that the officer is at fault for the accident.
2
The emergency room report states: "Multiple sutures of 5-0 and 6-0 Vicryl were used to
approximate the deep portions of his [sic] wound and multiple sutures of 5-0 and 6-0 nylon were
used to approximate the superficial tissue. Two sutures of 6-0 nylon were placed in an
interrupted fashion on the eyelid laceration."
-1-
above it.3 Pictures of plaintiff 's face reveal a triangular-type area of scar tissue that, according to
plastic surgeon James Lawson, could be "excised and closed by buried suture plastic technique to
greatly improve their appearance."
Our no-fault system allows a plaintiff to collect damages if a scar is a "permanent serious
disfigurement." MCL 500.3135(1). The pictures reveal that these irregularly shaped scars
sharply contrast with plaintiff 's skin tone. They are readily noticeable to anyone who would
look plaintiff in the eye, and it will not abate without serious surgical intervention. See Kanaziz
v Rounds, 153 Mich App 180, 185-187; 395 NW2d 278 (1986). In my opinion, a genuine factual
issue regarding the severity of the scars is created by the pictures and Dr. Lawson's testimony
that corrective surgery is necessary to ameliorate the primary scar and the "complex of scars"
above it. In other words, the jury should decide if, in fact, the scar is a "permanent serious
disfigurement." MCL 500.3135(2)(a).
/s/ Peter D. O'Connell
3
A second scar above it is eleven millimeters in length. Added together, plaintiff has twentytwo millimeters of scar tissue above her right eye.
-2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.