Insurance companies are very adept at documenting the information provided when a policy is purchased. They record calls and maintain the application for insurance. They generally do not research whether the information provided by the insured is accurate until after a claim is filed. If an insurance company determines that materially false representations were made when the policy was purchased, it has an option known as “rescission.” This action cancels the insurance policy and permits the insurance company to reject any claims made under the policy.

When a motorcyclist is injured in an accident involving a motor vehicle, the motorcyclist obtains personal injury protection (PIP) benefits according to the order of priority specified under MCL 500.3114 (5). First in the order of priority to pay is the insurer of the owner or registrant of the motor vehicle involved in the accident. Next is the insurer of the operator of the motor vehicle involved in the accident. Next is the motorcyclist’s own insurance, and so on down the line.  But what happens if the PIP benefits available from the first- in- priority insurer are exhausted?

Plaintiff brought a premises liability lawsuit against a grocery store for negligence after suffering from a slip-and-fall over some spilled bleach. Plaintiff alleged the spill had been there for six minutes and the employees had been aware of it, but failed to act.

Often during the course of civil litigation, it is important to obtain information which is commonly recorded by cellphone providers. Cellphone records are particularly helpful to determine whether an individual was driving distracted at the time of a motor vehicle accident. However, there are many impediments to obtaining cellphone records.

Our firm recently defended a claim brought by an uninsured motorcyclist who was struck by our client who was operating his own motor vehicle. The first question which needed to be answered was whether the motorcyclist could sustain claims for bodily injury (non-economic, pain and suffering) damages and/or damages for personal injury protection benefits (economic damages such as medical expenses, wage loss, and replacement services).

When an ERISA health plan pays medical bills for an injured party because of the negligence of a third-party, the ERISA plan usually has a “super lien” against any financial recovery. Federal law preempts state law.

In a recently published Michigan Court of Appeals opinion, the court determined that an arbitration provision in a Best Buy employment contract was reasonable and not unconscionable. In this case, Best Buy required all potential employees to sign an employment contract which contained an arbitration provision.

The Michigan Court of Appeals recently published an opinion which arose from a claim under the Michigan No-Fault Act. A motor vehicle accident took place between vehicles driven by Plaintiff Muzafer Isovska and Defendant Leana Fitspatrick. The issue was which of the two (2) auto insurance policies covering the Plaintiff and her daughter provided coverage.

Plaintiff Estate brought a wrongful death claim against Defendant alleging negligence. The Defendant moved for summary disposition. Summary disposition was granted after the Trial Judge determined that the decedent was more than 50% at fault and that Defendant was presented with a sudden emergency. The Court of Appeals reversed the summary disposition and sent the case back for trial.

We have heard the horror stories coming out of states like Florida and California arising from “bad faith” claims against insurance companies. A bad faith claim occurs when an insurance company refuses an opportunity to settle a case within an insured’s policy limits, goes to trial on the case, and a judgment more than the available policy limits is entered against the insured.