The No-Fault Act (NFA); Personal protection insurance (PIP) medical benefit policy limits; Priority for payment of no-fault benefits to an injured motorcyclist; MCL 500.3114(5); Claim for additional benefits from a lower-priority insurer that provides unlimited coverage; MCL 500.3107c(1)(b); Mary Free Bed Rehab Hosp v Esurance Prop & Cas Co
In this consolidated appeal, the court held that, under Mary Free Bed, MCL 500.3114(5) allowed plaintiffs to recover PIP medical benefits from plaintiff-Maher’s “lower-priority Farm Bureau motor vehicle policy after PIP medical-benefits coverage was exhausted under” defendant-Allstate’s higher-priority policy. Thus, the trial court erred in granting summary disposition to Farm Bureau and Allstate. Maher was riding his motorcycle when he was struck by Allstate’s insured’s vehicle. The Allstate policy “carried a coverage limit of $250,000 for PIP medical benefits.” Maher’s no-fault policy with Farm Bureau “carried unlimited coverage for PIP medical benefits.” Allstate made PIP benefit payments until its policy limit was exhausted. Farm Bureau denied Maher’s claim for PIP benefits “on the ground that Allstate was solely responsible for paying Maher’s PIP benefits because Allstate was higher in priority under MCL 500.3114(5).” Maher sued Farm Bureau, and two of his medical providers sued Farm Bureau and Allstate. On appeal, plaintiffs argued the trial court erred in granting defendants summary disposition because the NFA “does not preclude plaintiffs from claiming PIP medical benefits from Maher’s lower-priority Farm Bureau policy, which carried unlimited coverage, after PIP medical coverage from the capped higher-priority Allstate policy was exhausted.” The court agreed. It recently held in Mary Free Bed that “when the policy coverage limit of a higher-priority insurer under MCL 500.3114(5) is exhausted, an injured person or their treatment provider may claim additional benefits from a lower-priority insurer that provides unlimited coverage.” Mary Free Bed governed the outcome here. Reversed and remanded.
Full PDF Opinion