Michigan Law

Defendant insurer denied a defense or indemnification to its insured when he struck and injured a motorcyclist while making a pizza delivery. The insurer argued that its insured’s actions at the time of the motor vehicle accident constituted operation of a “public and livery conveyance.” The auto insurance policy excluded coverage when the insured vehicle was being used as a “public conveyance.” The Trial Court sided with the insured and an appeal ensued.

Plaintiff was driving on I-696 when a piece of freeway concrete hit his windshield, causing head injuries. Plaintiff sent a notice of claim to MDOT before suing the state agency. The Court of Claims ruled that Plaintiff’s notice was defective and granted summary disposition for the Defendant. On appeal, the Michigan Supreme Court reversed and remanded the case.

Governor Gretchen Whitmer recently announced that the state’s 2019 insurance reform legislation, which first took effect on July 1, 2020, is delivering savings for auto insurance policyholders.

Plaintiff went to a convenience store on New Year’s Eve when she slipped and fell on a piece of wet cardboard placed under a floor mat just inside the store. The trial court summarily dismissed the case, ruling that the cardboard was an open-and-obvious danger. The Michigan Court of Appeals reversed the decision, writing that while the cardboard may have been open and obvious, the risk posed by the cardboard was not.

In a “hit and run” accident, the driver would be unidentifiable and unknown according to a recent Michigan Court of Appeals ruling. The trial court was upheld, which denied plaintiff’s claim for uninsured motorist (UM) coverage.

Geico only paid a partial amount on a healthcare provider’s bill for prescribed attendant services in a PIP benefits case. The provider filed a lawsuit for the unpaid benefits and the circuit court dismissed the case. On appeal, Geico argued that the charges in question could not be billed for under MCL 500.3107(1)(a), which is the applicable statute. The court agreed.

A Michigan Trial Court held that plaintiff was entitled to PIP benefits after she fell into a service pit while her car was parked for service. The Michigan Court of Appeals reversed, ruling that the no-fault act was not designed to compensate for all injuries occurring in or around a motor vehicle.