Blog

Attorneys Kyle Dysarz and Deborah Lujan Obtain Summary Disposition for Well-Established Hotel and Restaurant in Unique Premises-Liability Case

Attorneys Kyle M. Dysarz and Deborah A. Lujan recently obtained summary disposition in favor of a well-established Ann Arbor hotel and restaurant based upon its lack of notice in a unique premises-liability case. For full details, click on the headline.

Attorney Matthew LaBeau Discusses Use of Claims to Prove/Disprove Damages During Trial at ICLE No-Fault Summit

Defense-litigation attorney Matthew S. LaBeau of Collins Einhorn Farrell PC recently spoke on Using the Claims File to Prove and Disprove Damages at Trial at the fifth annual ICLE No-Fault Summit. He was joined by plaintiff attorney Adrienne D. Logeman of Logeman Iafrate & Logeman PC. Matt provided an in-depth perspective on how to effectively document the claim file, avoid claims for interest and attorney fees, and bolster the defense through strategic use of the claim file in discovery and at trial.

For a full outline of Matt’s presentation, email him at Matthew.LaBeau@ceflawyers.com.

Court of Appeals Holds Anti-Assignment Clauses Unenforceable, but Healthcare Providers Can Only Recover Benefits One-Year-Back from Date of Assignment

On May 8, 2018, the Michigan Court of Appeals issued a published opinion addressing two legal issues that have been hotly contested in the wake of last year’s Covenant v State Farm decision, which held that healthcare providers do not have a statutory basis to sue no-fault insurers for personal protection insurance (“PIP”) benefits under the Michigan No-Fault Act. To read further details, click on the headline.

Attorneys Dysarz and Frederick Win Summary Disposition for No-Fault Insurer Based on Statutory “Intentional Act” Defense

Attorneys MaryRachel Dysarz and Lauren Frederick obtained summary disposition of a $641,361.09 claim for no-fault benefits, based on the statutory “intentional act” defense of MCL 500.3105(4). The Court found that the plaintiff’s intent to kill himself was so evident that not even his blood-alcohol level or testimony from his psychiatry expert regarding his impaired cognitive functioning could defeat summary disposition. For full details, click the headline.

Attorneys Kari Melkonian and Lindsey Peck Obtain Summary Disposition in Oakland County Circuit Court

Attorneys Kari L. Melkonian and Lindsey A. Peck won summary disposition in favor of a snow-removal company in a slip-and-fall case. The Court dismissed the plaintiff’s claims against the defendant, holding that the defendant didn’t owe the plaintiff a separate duty. The Court also granted the snow-removal contractor’s motion for summary disposition on a third-party complaint filed against its subcontractor. The Court found that, under the terms of the snow-removal subcontract, the subcontractor owed the contractor and property owner both defense and indemnification.

Attorneys Kevin Moloughney and Patrick Walbridge Obtain Summary Disposition on Auto-Negligence Claim

Collins Einhorn attorneys Kevin P. Moloughney and Patrick J. Walbridge won summary disposition on a third-party auto-negligence claim, based on the plaintiff’s failure to prove that he suffered an objectively manifested impairment of an important body function. The Court agreed that the medical records relied on by the plaintiff only demonstrated subjective complaints, which were insufficient to meet the serious impairment threshold imposed by the Michigan No-Fault Act.

Attorneys Matthew S. LaBeau and Peter J. Tomasek Obtain Summary Disposition in No-Fault Case

Attorneys Matthew S. LaBeau and Peter J. Tomasek obtained summary disposition in Calhoun County Circuit Court in a lawsuit for first-party, no-fault benefits. A hospital claimed that, under an assignment clause in the hospital’s consent-for-treatment form and the hospital’s fee agreement with Cofinity/PPOM, it had standing to claim over $400,000 in no-fault benefits. The Court rejected this argument, finding that the assignment was invalid and that the Cofinity/PPOM agreement didn’t give the hospital standing. The Court dismissed the case in its entirety.

Attorney Kellie L. Howard-Goudy to speak at RIMS Conference on Autonomous Vehicle Liability and Insurable Risks

On Monday, April 17, 2018, attorney Kellie L. Howard-Goudy will be speaking at the Risk Management Society, RIMS, Annual Conference in San Antonio, Texas. Ms. Howard-Goudy will speak at one of the conference’s “innovation hubs,” which are focused on cutting-edge developments in topics related to risk management. Ms. Howard-Goudy’s session is entitled Autonomous Vehicles: The Present, the Future, and Insurable Risks. The presentation contains a detailed analysis of technical developments in the autonomous-vehicle industry and an outline of risk issues affecting insurers. Ms. Howard-Goudy will be joined by Timothy D. Crawley, Esq. (Anderson, Crawley & Burke, PLLC) who will discuss current regulatory efforts in the autonomous-vehicle industry. Information covered will include emerging issues with data privacy and ethical issues related to artificial intelligence.

Collins Einhorn Attorneys Obtain Reversal and Summary Disposition from Michigan Court of Appeals in Multi-million Dollar Premises-liability Case

Collins Einhorn Attorneys Kenneth C. Merritt, Kari L. Melkonian, and Jonathan B. Koch successfully defended a multi-million dollar premises-liability case. The defendant was an auction-services company hired to conduct an estate sale at a private residence. After the estate sale concluded, the plaintiff was injured when she fell down a three-foot drop-off created by a missing set of stairs after she stepped through a set of exterior doors in the house’s dining room. Based on that incident, plaintiff filed this premises-liability suit against the auction company, claiming several million dollars in damages. After the trial court denied defendant’s motion for summary disposition, Collins Einhorn attorneys obtained a rare grant of leave to appeal from the Court of Appeals. After full briefing and oral argument, the Court of Appeals reversed. The panel held that the trial court should have granted summary disposition because the defendant lacked possession and control over the property and because the hazard was open-and-obvious. The Supreme Court denied plaintiff’s application for leave to appeal.

Attorneys Anderson and Cook Successfully Defend Legal-Malpractice Claim Arising Out of a Stabbing at a Hookah Lounge

The plaintiff filed a legal-malpractice complaint against his criminal-defense lawyer. His claims were based on his conviction for assault with intent to do great bodily harm less than murder—he stabbed a man in the neck during a fight at a hookah lounge. After his conviction, the plaintiff filed a motion arguing that he did not receive effective assistance of counsel. The criminal court denied the motion. In the civil case, David Anderson represented the criminal-defense lawyer and obtained summary dismissal. He argued, and the court agreed, that the trial court’s finding in the criminal case that plaintiff did, in fact, receive effective assistance of counsel collaterally estopped him from claiming that his lawyer committed malpractice. The plaintiff appealed and Michael Cook successfully obtained a Michigan Court of Appeals opinion affirming the trial court’s ruling.

Have questions or looking for further information? Contact one of our attorneys.