“Dr. Becker testified at the hearing on Ms. Morrison’s behalf. He was qualified as an expert in conducting catastrophic impairment assessments based on the AMA Guides. He testified that it was not his practice to provide a definite WPI rating as the Guides provide a range for various physical impairments without providing a specific methodology for selecting a number within the range. Therefore, it was his opinion that it is left to the trier of fact to select a number within the range after hearing the totality of evidence …
… It makes sense to conclude that because of her pain and the effect of treatment, her range of motion would vary on different days. I am persuaded by Ms. Morrison’s submission that a fair assessment of her range of motion should be taken on her worst day. I accept Ms. Morrison’s submission that taking this approach fosters the spirit of Desbiens v Mordini where the Court emphasized that the legislature’s definition of catastrophic impairment is intended to be inclusive and to ensure that victims with the greatest health needs have access to expanded medical and rehabilitation benefits.”