Tag

General and Automotive Liability

Michigan No-Fault Update: Bazzi v Sentinel Ins Co — Supreme Court Decision

It’s a long-standing principle that no-fault insurers can assert common-law defenses, such as fraud in the application, in order to obtain rescission of a policy and avoid liability for payment of benefits on a claim. If a policy is rescinded, it’s as if the policy was never issued in the first place.

The innocent-third-party rule was a judicially created exception to this principle. Under the rule, insurers couldn’t use the defense of fraud in the application against a third party (that is, someone other than the policyholder) making a claim under a policy. The reasoning was that, because the third-party claimant didn’t commit the fraud, it was unfair for insurance companies to rescind the policy based on fraud.

We take a look at the recent Michigan Supreme Court decision in Bazzi v Sentinel Ins Co, and what this means for insurance companies moving forward. Click the headline for further details.

Attorney Scott Pawlak Successfully Obtains Summary Disposition on Behalf of No-Fault Insurer

Attorney Scott J. Pawlak obtained summary disposition on behalf of a no-fault insurer for charges for chiropractor-referred MRIs. The Court agreed with the insurer that, because Michigan’s No-Fault Act did not include MRIs within the scope of “chiropractic care” as of January 1, 2009, no-fault insurers are not required to reimburse for MRIs that have been ordered by a chiropractor. The Court further noted that, because the performance or ordering of an MRI is beyond the scope of chiropractic care, there was no way that such testing could be deemed a “reasonably necessary service.”

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.

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