There Is a Difference: No-Fault Insured Claim vs. Statutory Claim
No-Fault Newsline 01/02/2018

In Farrell v Farm Bureau Insurance (Unpublished, November 28, 2017, Docket No. 335979), the Michigan Court of Appeals highlighted the difference between a named insured’s claim for no‑fault benefits and a claim made pursuant to statute. The Michigan Court of Appeals concluded that no-fault claims made pursuant to statute are not governed or controlled by any contractual agreement and, therefore, Bahri v IDS Property Cas. Ins. Co., 308 Mich App 420 (2014) does not set forth the appropriate standard for determining if a claim should be barred for fraud or material misrepresentation.

To access the full article:

Secrest Wardle Welcomes Executive Partner Shelly Lee Griffin to Troy Location
In The News 03/13/2018

Driving While Disabled: Using Transportation Service While Physically Capable of Driving is Fraud
No-Fault Newsline 03/05/2018

Secrest Wardle Welcomes Partner Lisa C. Baluha to Troy Location
In The News 02/23/2018

Announcing the Next Episode of Secrest Wardle's "MI PIP Monthly"
In The News 02/22/2018

Secrest Wardle Executive Partner, Margaret Scott, Appointed to the State Bar of Michigan’s Representative Assembly
In The News 02/21/2018

Click Here For All Press Releases

Where Unstable Porch Gives Rise to Inference of Property Owner’s Negligence, No Evidence of Notice is Required
Boundaries 03/12/2018

COA: "Serious Impairment" is Not a Question of Law
No-Fault Newsline 03/07/2018

Entitlement to PIP Benefits: Motor Vehicle Must 'Actively Contribute' to Accident in Order to be Considered “Involved” under MCL 500.3113
No-Fault Newsline 03/02/2018

Plaintiff’s Motion for Directed Verdict on the Issue of Serious Impairment Properly “Knicked”
No-Fault Newsline 03/01/2018

"I think, therefore it is" is insufficient to establish causation.
Boundaries 02/22/2018

View All Publications