Michigan Law

Michigan insurance lawyer Peter Angelas explains the benefits of hiring an insurance defense attorney to conduct a "documentation of evidence" investigation if a claim includes a significant injury or has a large policy limit. The leading benefit of retaining defense counsel is that the investigation data is privileged as attorney work product.

A nursing home was sued for wrongful death based upon asserted negligence. The nursing home decided to retain its own counsel and defend itself in the action. Not until almost two (2) years later did the nursing home notify its insurer about the wrongful death lawsuit. It then sought to be reimbursed for its defense costs.

Five Michigan residents and one New Jersey resident are being charged by Michigan law enforcement with a range of crimes, including insurance fraud, false pretenses, and conducting a criminal enterprise.

Generally, on a multi-employer construction jobsite in Michigan, whoever controls the “means and methods” of the construction project is the company ultimately liable for any negligently caused personal injuries. The case law controlling liability for work-site accidents goes back a long way to Funk v General Motors, a case cited over 191 times since 1974.

The take-aways from this crazy courtroom story of a forged document are: 1) do not fabricate evidence; 2) always be wary of the evidence presented by your opponent; and 3) analyze the opposition’s evidence to verify its authenticity.

Whether you are a claimant or insurance adjuster involved in the Michigan no-fault (PIP) system, one needs to know and understand the Michigan No Fault deadlines which became effective June 10, 2019.

Rather than delay, deny and defend, try a different approach in an insurance dispute with a claimant’s attorney. With the knowledge, participation, and approval of the stakeholders, retain negotiation counsel to make contact with the claimant or counsel.

In a recent U.S. District Court case, the Court determined that a surgical center had been defrauding the Plaintiffs, three no-fault insurers, by using the wrong CPT codes for surgical procedures resulting in a $652,557.00 overpayment.