In Braverman ex rel Smutzki v Auto-Owners Insurance Company, the Court of Appeals issued another legal ruling on the extent or level of "involvement of a motor vehicle" in a motorcycle accident required under the No-Fault Act. In the past couple of months, the Court of Appeals has issued two other opinions, each of which seem [...]
Tag: no fault act
Police Vehicle in Pursuit of Fleeing Motorcycle “Involved” in Motorcyclist’s Accident with Another Vehicle and County Liable to Participate with Auto Insurer in Reimbursement for Medical Care
In, State Farm v. MMRMA, the Michigan Court of Appeals addressed whether a police vehicle in pursuit of an uninsured motorcyclist who was fleeing was sufficiently “involved” in an accident between the motorcyclist and another vehicle such that the insurer of the latter vehicle (State Farm) could seek pro rata contribution from the county’s insurer, the Michigan Municipal [...]
Police Vehicle in Pursuit of Fleeing Motorcycle “Involved” in Motorcyclist’s Accident with Another Vehicle and County Liable to Participate with Auto Insurer in Reimbursement for Medical Care
In, State Farm v. MMRMA, the Michigan Court of Appeals addressed whether a police vehicle in pursuit of an uninsured motorcyclist who was fleeing was sufficiently "involved" in an accident between the motorcyclist and another vehicle such that the insurer of the latter vehicle (State Farm) could seek pro rata contribution from the county's insurer, the [...]
No-Fault Insurer Entitled to Judgment on Hospital’s Claim for Reimbursement of Medical Expenses for Motorcyclist’s Injuries for Accident Caused in Avoiding Collision with Motor Vehicle
In DMC v. Progressive, The Court of Appeals reversed a trial court judgment for the plaintiff hospital which sought reimbursement from defendant no-fault insurer of medical expenses for care to an injured motorcyclist. The motorcyclist suffered serious injuries after he ditched his bike to avoid a collision with an automobile about to cross into his path. [...]
Michigan Supreme Court Rules “Base Price” of Van Not Included as “Allowable Expense” Under Personal Insurance Protection Benefits of the No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act
In a 4-1 opinion (JJ. Viviano and McCormack not participating), the Michigan Supreme Court ruled the "base price" of a van was not an allowable PIP expense under the No-Fault Act. MCL 500.3107(1)(a) permits an injured person to recover personal injury protection (PIP) benefits from an insurer for “[a]llowable expenses consisting of all reasonable charges incurred for [...]