Name: C-Spine Orthopedics, PLLC v. Progressive Michigan Ins. Co. Court: Michigan Supreme Court Issued: July 3, 2025 INTRODUCTION This summer, we tracked several updates to No-Fault Act case law developments from across the Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals. Included herein is a salient discussion of those updates. In C-Spine , Progressive argued that C-Spine could not maintain an action because they assigned away their claims and hence, were not the parties in inter

Name: Memberselect Insurance Company v. Sam Yono and Muntaha Yono Court / Judge: Oakland Circuit Court; Michigan Court of Appeals Issued: May 8, 2025 INTRODUCTION On May 8, 2025, in Yono v. MemberSelect , the Michigan Court of Appeals held that “satisfactory proof of loss does not require agreement of the parties as to the amount of damage.” MemberSelect rejected the Yonos’ proof of loss—claiming the amount was excessive and not supported by the proofs—and the parties entered

NAME: Matthew Burchard v Treetops Acquisition Company, LLC COURT / JUDGE: Otsego County Circuit Court; Michigan Court of Appeals ATTORNEYS: Plaintiff: Gregg Herman of Gregg E. Herman, P.C. & Mark Bendure of Bendure & Thomas, PLC Defendant: Kailen C. Piper & David Carbajal, O'Neill, Wallace & Doyle, P.C. ISSUED: March 14, 2024 INTRODUCTION On March 14, 2024, the Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed the Otsego County Circuit Court's Order granting summary disposition to the Defen

Case Name: Andary v. USAA Casualty Insurance Company et. al. Court: Michigan Supreme Court Issued: July 31, 2023 INTRODUCTION On July 31, 2023, the Michigan Supreme Court issued its 5-2 decision Andary v. USAA Casualty Insurance Company et. al. The key issues addressed by the Court included whether the 2019 amendments to the Michigan No-Fault Act apply retroactively and whether prospective application of said amendments is constitutional. The Court held that the 2019 amendme

Name: Kandil-Elsayed v F & E Oil, Inc. & Pinksy v Kroger Co. of Mich Court: Michigan Supreme Court Issued: July 28, 2023 INTRODUCTION The Michigan Supreme Court recently issued an Opinion analyzing the Open and Obvious Doctrine set forth in Lugo v Ameritech Corp.  and how it is inconsistent with § 343A of the Second Restatement of Torts and Michigan's comparative fault framework. The Court overruled Lugo finding that while the Open and Obvious Doctrine is relevant to breach

Name: Encompass Healthcare, PLLC v. Citizens Insurance Company Court: Michigan Court of Appeals Issued: November 17, 2022 INTRODUCTION The Michigan Court of Appeals recently issued an opinion in which they analyzed the 2019 Amendments to the No-Fault Act to reinstate the equitable tolling of the one-year-back rule that had been previously discarded in Devillers v Auto Club Ins. Ass'n , 473 Mich. 562, 702 N.W.2d 539 (2005). In summary, the Court held that a formal denial of a

Name: Andary v. USAA Casualty Insurance Company et. al. Court: Michgian Court of Appeals Issued: August 25, 2022 INTRODUCTION The Michigan Court of Appeals recently issued an opinion in Andary v. USAA Casualty Insurance Company et. al. related to the applicability of the 2019 amendments to the Michigan No-Fault Act to expenses arising out of motor-vehicle accidents that occurred prior to the effective date of the amendments. In sum, the Court held that the 2019 amendments to

CASE INFORMATION Name: Schaumann- Beltran v. Gemmete Court/Judge: Michigan Supreme Court – Order on Application for Leave to Appeal. Issued: May 13, 2022 INTRODUCTION The Michigan Supreme Court recently issued a ruling in the matter of Schaumann- Beltran v. Gemmete , holding that under MCR 2.311(A), trial courts have the discretionary authority to direct that a physical or mental examination be videorecorded. The Court of Appeals previously construed the language of MCR 2.311

Name: RAMIREZ C. HOME-OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY Court/Judge: Michigan Court of Appeals, unpublished Per Curiam Opinion of Judge Boonstra, Judge Borrello and Judge Rick Issued: February 10, 2022 INTRODUCTION When an insurer has a question regarding whether benefits incurred by an insured are causally related to an accident, it generally will obtain an Independent Medical Examination for a determination. In Ramirez v. Home-Owners Insurance Company , the Michigan Court of Appeals

CASE INFORMATION Name: AHLAM KANDIL-ELSAYED v. F&E OIL, INC. Court/Judge: Michigan Supreme Court – Order on Application for Leave to Appeal. Issued: February 4, 2022 INTRODUCTION Following our prior Newsletter on the Court of Appeals decision in this case,  the saga continues in what could be a signficant paradigm shift in premises liability law. In essence, the outcome of this case could considerably reduce the protections in the Open and Obvious Doctrine and prevent the fut

CASE INFORMATION Name: DOREEN ROTT v. ARTHUR ROTT Court/Judge: Michigan Supreme Court – Opinion by Justice WELCH and Concurrence in part and Dissent by Justice VIVIANO. Decided July 30, 2021 INTRODUCTION The purpose of Recreational Land Use Act (RUA) was "to encourage owners of land to make land and water areas available to the public for recreational purposes by limiting their liability toward persons entering thereon for such purposes." When properly invoked, MCL 324.73301(

CASE INFORMATION Name: Walker v. Hela Mgmt, LLC Court/ Judges: Michigan Court of Appeals –Unpublished Per Curium Opinion by Judges Riordan, Kelly, and Shapiro Decided: July 15, 2021 INTRODUCTION "The statutory protection under MCL 554.139(1) arises from the existence of a residential lease and consequently becomes a statutorily mandated term of such lease." Accordingly, a breach of the landlord's duty to maintain the premises in accordance with MCL 554.139 is construed as a b

CASE INFORMATION Name: ESTATE OF DONNA LIVINGS v SAGE'S INVESTMENT GROUP, LLC Court/ Judge: Michigan Supreme Court—Opinion by Justice David VIVIANO, joined by Chief Justice MCCORMACK and Justices BERNSTEIN and CAVANAGH Decided: June 30, 2021. INTRODUCTION The Michigan Supreme Court authored a new decision on June 30, 2021 in Estate of Donna Livings v. Sage's Investment Group, LLC . The decision provides that a plaintiff may create a question of fact as to whether an open an

CASE INFORMATION Name: Meemic Ins. Co. v. Fortson et al. Court/Judge: Michigan Supreme Court – Opinion written by Justice David Viviano Decided: July 29, 2020. INTRODUCTION The Michigan Supreme Court issued a new decision on July 29, 2020 in Meemic Ins. Co. v. Fortson et al. Meemic which limits the ability of an insurer to rescind an auto policy ab initio to circumstances involving fraud during the procurement of a policy. This decision does not preclude an insurer from den

CASE INFORMATION Name: Gavrilides Management Co. v Michigan Insurance Co. , Docket No. 20-000258-CB Court/Judge: 30 th Circuit Court, Ingham County – Judge Joyce Draganuck Decided: July 1, 2020 INTRODUCTION The COVID-19 social distancing measures in Michigan and selective shutdowns pursuant to Governor Whitmer's Executive Orders have resulted in a vast influx of business income loss and business interruption claims under Commercial Property policies over the last few mont

CASE INFORMATION Name: JF Warren, LLC et al. v. Consolidated Ins. Co. , Docket No. 347762 Court/Judge: State of Michigan Court of Appeals—Chief Judge Murray, Judge Jansen, and Judge Markey Decided: June 25, 2020 Publication: Unpublished INTRODUCTION Pursuant to Michigan's No-Fault Act under MCL 500.3121(5), an insurer is required to pay the lesser of either: (1) the reasonable repair cost; or (2) the replacement cost less depreciation for "accidental damage to tangible pr

"Accident" is expanded to encompass the insured's work damaged by a subcontractor   CASE INFORMATION Name: Skanska USA Bldg. Inc. v. M.A.P. Mechanical Contractors, Inc. et al. Court/Judge: Michigan Supreme Court—Opinion Written by Chief Justice McCormack Decided: June 29, 2020 INTRODUCTION Michigan Commercial General Liability ("CGL") insurers now run the risk of obligating themselves to cover losses that have traditionally been excluded. Under the Michigan Supreme Court's

We are pleased to announce that Tobin Dust of Dust & Campbell, P.C., will be joining our firm effective November 1, 2019.  The move will provide our clients with the superior representation and support they have grown accustomed to, as well as a broader scope of specialization and trial practice. Mr. Dust will continue to represent clients in a broad range of defense litigation and consultation including general liability, employment, business, and the defense of Tribes and t

INTRODUCTION The newly amended No-Fault Act made significant changes to Michigan auto-insurance requirements. Many of the changes were highly publicized, such as tiered benefit systems, a "Fraud Division," and lowered costs. Although most of our clients are well aware of the law and have read many pros and cons from different sources, the Amendment adds verbiage and language that creates unnecessary intricacy to an already complex system. This bulletin addresses some of the c

Premises Liability Update--Court of Appeals Expands Defenses for Landlords to Statutory Slip-and-Fall Claims York v Berger Realty Group, Inc. Introduction The Open and Obvious Doctrine is not a defense to a statutory claim brought under MCL 554.139. However, MCL 554.139(1)(a) only requires that a common area be fit for its intended use by the parties. The intended, primary use of a parking lot is parking cars while walking is a secondary use. If there is evidence that at leas