Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 47157; Published
Judges Brennan, Bronson, and Bashara; 2-1 (With J. Bashara Dissenting)
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 105 Mich App 528; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
One-Year Notice Rule Limitation [§3145(1)]
Required Content of Notice / Sufficiency of Notice [§3145(1)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In a 2-1 Opinion by Judge Brennan, the Court of Appeals held that where an injured claimant gave oral notice to his insurance agent that he had been involved in an automobile accident several days earlier and the insurance agent completed a written report entitled "Auto Accident Notice" which was sent to the claims department of the insurance company, there had been sufficient compliance with the notice/statute of limitation provisions of §3145 of the No-Fault Act. The Court rejected the defendant's argument that the notice was defective because it was not a written notice given by plaintiff. To invalidate the notice simply because the actual writing was prepared by the insurance agent would be an "unnecessary, over technical, literal construction and application of the notice provision of §3145(1)."
The question of whether or not the notice was defective because it did not specify the nature of the injury suffered was remanded back to the trial court to determine whether or not "there was substantial compliance under §3145(1)" regarding injury description.
Judge Bashara dissented, contending that the notice was defective because it was an oral notice to an agent of the company which is contrary to the dictates of the statute.