Skip to main content

February 2017

Feb 2017
February 16, 2017

COA holds that a question of fact prevents summary disposition on a PIP claim based on an insurer's fraud exclusion

In Tyann Shelton v Auto-Owners Insurance Company, No 328473, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision in holding an exclusionary provision that defendant's no-fault policy does not bar plaintiff's personal injury protection (PIP) claim. The defendant sought summary disposition based upon a fraud exclusion clause in its policy, asserting that plaintiff made fraudulent statements concerning her need for replacement services and so was excluded by the policy from all PIP benefits. The trial court granted summary disposition as to replacement services and denied the motion as to payment for medical services and from that ruling, defendant appeals by leave granted.

Feb 2017
February 08, 2017

MSC grants leave to appeal as to whether percentage allocation of premium contributions is a mandatory subject of bargaining

In Shelby Township v Command Officers Association of Michigan, No 323491, the Michigan Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to address bargaining requirements related to public employees’ contributions to medical benefit plans pursuant to the Publicly Funded Health Insurance Contribution Act and the Public Employment Relations Act. The Publicly Funded Health Insurance Contribution Act, MCL 15.561 et seq., limits how much public employers may pay toward healthcare costs for employee medical benefit plans.  

Feb 2017
February 06, 2017

MSC grants second MOAA on whether an order denying a motion to change schools is a postjudgment order affecting the custody of a minor

In Ozimek v Rodgers, No. 154776, the Michigan Supreme Court granted mini-oral argument as to whether an order denying the plaintiff mother’s motion to change the school was “a postjudgment order affecting the custody of a minor” and therefore a “final order” under MCR 7.202(6)(a)(iii). 

Displaying results 1-6 (of 11)
 |<  < 1 - 2  >  >| 

NOTICE. Although we would like to hear from you, we cannot represent you until we know that doing so will not create a conflict of interest. Also, we cannot treat unsolicited information as confidential. Accordingly, please do not send us any information about any matter that may involve you until you receive a written statement from us that we represent you.

By clicking the ‘ACCEPT’ button, you agree that we may review any information you transmit to us. You recognize that our review of your information, even if you submitted it in a good faith effort to retain us, and even if you consider it confidential, does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could and will be used against you.

Please click the ‘ACCEPT’ button if you understand and accept the foregoing statement and wish to proceed.



+ -