Action by a healthcare provider to collect no-fault benefits; Real party in interest; MCR 2.201(B); Standing; Effect of the provider’s assigning its rights to the relevant accounts receivable & later obtaining counterassignments returning those rights; C-Spine Orthopedics, PLLC v Progressive MI Ins Co

Concluding C-Spine Orthopedics was not distinguishable, the court found that it was compelled to reverse summary disposition for defendant-insurer and remand the case. Plaintiff-C-Spine sought no-fault benefits from defendant after providing medical treatment to defendant’s insured, nonparty-G, for injuries sustained in an auto accident. Before it filed this suit, it assigned its rights to G’s accounts receivable to some factoring companies. Based on those assignments, the trial court determined plaintiff “was not the real-party in interest and lacked standing when it filed this action. In so ruling, the trial court noted the existence of alleged counterassignments in which the factoring companies purportedly conveyed the accounts receivable back to C-Spine, but” did not address them on the ground plaintiff had not addressed any of defendant’s arguments as to the alleged counterassignments. On appeal, the court noted that C-Spine Orthopedics was highly similar factually and, in that case, it “held that a plaintiff like C-Spine has standing and is the real party in interest.” Applying that decision, the court held it was “required to conclude that C-Spine, having statutory standing under MCL 500.3112, has standing and is a real party in interest.” But it noted that because the trial court in this case “did not consider the counterassignments given C-Spine’s failure to address Auto Club’s arguments related to the counterassignments, C-Spine Orthopedics suggests that the factoring companies may need to be added to the action as necessary parties on remand, . . . to eliminate the risk of a second lawsuit by” them. The court rejected defendant’s attempts to distinguish C-Spine Orthopedics.