Court Opinion

ID: 9504624
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 19:57:16.403983+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:04:05.185444
License: Public Domain

*603Weaver, J.
(concurring). I agree with the majority’s conclusion that euo provisions may be included in no-fault policies, but are only enforceable to the extent that they do not conflict with the statutory requirements of the no-fault act, and that in the present case, the insurer impermissibly sought to enforce the provisions as a condition precedent to the insurer’s duty to pay no-fault benefits.
I write separately to emphasize that this Court’s holding should not be construed as one that would permit insurers to avoid their duty to pay no-fault benefits by merely claiming in every case that an insured who refused an examination under oath has failed to supply reasonable proof.