What is the test for determining whether a plaintiff has sustained a permanent impairment to her mental function as a result of a motor vehicle accident?

Being satisfied that the impairments and functional limitations of the plaintiff are “permanent” and “important”, the court must determine whether they are “serious” in accordance with Meyer v. Bright, supra. First, it is the seriousness of the impairment that is the focus of this inquiry, not the seriousness of the injury. Second, “a serious impairment is one which causes substantial interference with the ability of the injured person to perform his or her usual daily activities or to continue his or her regular employment” (emphasis added). Meyer v. Bright, supra at p. 142. The negative impact of the impairments of function on the particular individual person who is before the court must be considered by the court in two different aspects: first, as they affect the ability to continue “regular employment;” second, as they affect the ability to perform “usual daily activities.” As there is an infinite variety of individual lives led, each case must be decided on its own facts, based on all the evidence before the court, including but by no means limited to the medical evidence.