Court Opinion

ID: 9664421
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 00:18:50.126036+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:15:06.282372
License: Public Domain

McDonald, J.
(dissenting). I disagree and would reverse. Giving the benefit of reasonable doubt to plaintiff Star Steel, I believe a record could be developed regarding the terms of the insurance policy which would leave open an issue upon which reasonable minds could differ. Dumas v Auto Club Ins Ass'n, 168 Mich App 619, 626; 425 NW2d 480 (1988).
Plaintiff offered evidence that usf&g insured its company from 1932 to 1962, including product liability policies with limits of at least $500,000. Plaintiff further established continual payment of their premiums to usf&g during the relevant period as well as the filing by usf&g with the State of Michigan of a copy of standardized insurance policy dating to the relevant period. Usf&g does not deny the existence of an insurance agreement between the parties, maintaining only that it cannot locate such a policy given the company practice of destroying such documents after the passage of a certain number of years. That the insurance policy cannot be located should not be determinative of the issue whether such a policy existed *483and the terms thereof. The existence of a lost or destroyed written instrument may be established by other means. See Pavela v Balogh, 309 Mich 368; 15 NW2d 673 (1944); Joba Construction Co, Inc v Burns & Roe, Inc, 121 Mich App 615; 329 NW2d 760 (1982). The instant plaintiff should be afforded an opportunity to do just that at trial. I believe plaintiff’s action was improperly dismissed by motion where the trial judge had to engage in fact finding to do so. Paul v US Mutual Financial Corp, 150 Mich App 773; 389 NW2d 487 (1986).
Additionally, I would reinstate third-party defendants’ claims against usf&g because the trial court based its dismissal of these claims on its improper dismissal of plaintiff’s claims. Moreover, even assuming plaintiff fails to prove the exact terms of the policy, given the trial court’s finding of the existence of an insuring agreement, third-party defendants would at least be entitled to reimbursement from usf&g for its share of defendant Star Steel’s defense costs.