Attorney Matthew S. LaBeau represented a snow-removal company in a Macomb County slip-and-fall case. He argued that the court should dismiss the plaintiff’s claims because the snow-removal company didn’t owe the plaintiff a legal duty in the first place. This argument drew on a body of Michigan law holding that a plaintiff seeking damages for negligence must establish that the defendant owed a duty independent of its contractual obligations. Here, the Macomb County Circuit Court agreed with LaBeau’s argument that the snow-removal company didn’t owe the plaintiff a separate duty. It therefore entered a judgment in favor of the snow-removal company, dismissing the plaintiff’s claims for significant damages.

Plaintiff brought suit in federal court alleging $9 million in damages due to an alleged product defect. Attorneys David C. Anderson, Trent B. Collier and Eric M. Kociba defended the case, obtained summary judgment in their client’s favor, and persuaded the Court to dismiss the case. The Court’s 18-page opinion may be found at https://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/michigan/miedce/2:2016cv12866/313165/66.

Working on behalf of a no-fault insurer, attorney Scott J. Pawlak obtained summary disposition of Plaintiff’s claims in Oakland County Circuit Court due to Plaintiff’ fraudulent representations in his claim for benefits. By obtaining testimony from Plaintiff and his services provider that “directly and specifically contradicted” the representations made in Plaintiff’s replacement service statements, Attorney Pawlak was able to persuade the Court that the Plaintiff had committed fraud under the policy, without having to rely on surveillance evidence. The Plaintiff’s and his provider’s claims were dismissed with prejudice.

Attorneys Lauren Frederick and Brian Catrinar, both members of Collins Einhorn’s General and Automotive Liability Group, recently obtained a defense verdict in a Wayne County first-party no-fault case. After a seven-day jury trial, the jury returned a verdict of no cause of action, finding that plaintiff’s claim of accidental bodily injuries did not arise out of the automobile accident at issue. To learn more, click on the headline.

Judge Warren of the Oakland County Circuit Court granted Defendant’s motion for summary disposition in a case where medical providers submitted assignments purporting to transfer their patient’s right to collect PIP benefits from two companies that were not Defendant. Plaintiffs argued that these assignments should allow them to bring a cause of action against Defendant, an automobile insurance company, because of its business relationship with the other companies. They claimed Defendant and the other companies were all essentially the same entity and it was just a clerical mistake that the assignments did not name Defendant. Judge Warren agreed with defense attorneys Patrick J. Walbridge and Kevin P. Moloughney, who argued that the assignments could not be construed as transferring any cause of action against Defendant that the patient might have possessed.