Court Opinion

ID: 9670762
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 03:25:23.188762+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:06.368448
License: Public Domain

T. M. Burns, J.
(concurring). The majority states that it is open to question whether notice to the insurer tolls the one-year back provision of the no-fault act. I adhere to my position that such notice tolls the one-year limitation provision. Lansing General Hospital, Osteopathic v Gomez, 114 Mich App 814, 825; 319 NW2d 683 (1982); Preferred Risk Mutual Ins Co v State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins Co, 123 Mich App 416; 333 NW2d 303 (1983), lv den 417 Mich 1100.9 (1983). See also Ford Motor Co v Lumbermen’s Mutual Casualty Co, 413 Mich 22; 319 NW2d 320 (1982); The Tom Thomas Organization, Inc v Reliance Ins Co, 396 Mich 588; 242 NW2d 396 (1976); Richards v American Fellowship Mutual Ins Co, 84 Mich App 629; 270 NW2d 670 (1978), lv den 406 Mich 862 (1979); Andrews v Allstate Ins Co, 479 F Supp 481 (ED Mich, 1979). I do not agree with the reasoning in Kransz v Meredith, 123 Mich App 454; 332 NW2d 571 (1983), which is cited by the majority.