Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 259992; Published
Judges Jansen, Murphy, and Fort Hood; unanimous
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 275 Mich. App. 649, Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Providers Entitled to Charge Reasonable Amount for Services [3157]
Lawfully Rendered Treatment [3157]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous published opinion by Judge Murphy, the Court of Appeals held that even though a clinic which provided physical therapy was improperly incorporated, defendant Allstate Insurance Company was still required to pay for its insured’s physical therapy, because the treatment itself was lawfully rendered by properly licensed therapists.
In Miller v Allstate Insurance Company, 272 Mich App 284 (2006) [Item No. 2785], Allstate argued that PT Works, the business which employed the licensed therapist who rendered care to the plaintiff, did not lawfully render physical therapy services because PT Works was incorporated under the Michigan Corporation Business Act (BCA) instead of the Professional Service Corporation Act (PSCA). This distinction is important, because the PSCA requires the shareholders of the business to be licensed as physical therapists and those shareholders were not so licensed in this case. However, it was undisputed that plaintiff’s treatment was rendered by licensed physical therapists.
In finding for the plaintiff, the Court of Appeals determined that because the treatment was provided by licensed therapists, under MCL 500.3157, the treatment was lawfully provided. In so ruling, the court stated:
“MCL 500.3157, by its plain and unambiguous language, requires that the treatment itself be lawfully rendered. Reference to the terms ‘rendering’ and ‘treatment’ clearly places the focus on the act of actually engaging in the performance of services, here conducting physical therapy sessions, rather than on some underlying corporate formation issues that have nothing to do with the rendering of treatment. A clinic or institution is lawfully rendering treatment when licensed employees are caring for and providing services and treatment to patients despite the possible existence of corporate defects irrelevant to treatment.”
(emphasis in original)
The Supreme Court vacated the Court of Appeals decision and remanded for a determination of “whether PT Works may properly be incorporated solely under the BCA and not the Professional Service Corporation Act . . . and, once that determination is made, to reconsider . . . whether physical therapy provided by PT Works was ‘lawfully rendered’ under MCL 500.3157.” On remand, the Court of Appeals found that PT Works was improperly incorporated under the BCA. In so finding, it noted that under the BCA, if a corporation can be formed another statute, it cannot be formed under the BCA unless the other statute specifically provides for an alternate form of incorporation. Because the PCSA does not provide for an alternate form of incorporation, PT Works was improperly incorporated. Nevertheless, the Court of Appeals again held that despite the corporate formation of PT Works, the treatment was lawfully rendered because it was rendered by licensed therapists. In so holding, the court reasoned that MCL 500.3157 does not require that hospitals, clinics, or other institutions be lawfully organized or established, the statute simply requires that the treatment be lawfully rendered. In this regard, the court stated:
“We additionally note that MCL 500.3157 does not contain language providing that hospitals, clinics, and other institutions ‘lawfully organized, established, or incorporated’ may recover for their services, yet Allstate argues for just such an interpretation of the statutory language. . . . ‘a court may read nothing into an unambiguous statute that is not within the manifest intent of the Legislature as derived from the words of the statute itself. This maxim would be violated by construing MCL 500.3157 in the manner contrary to our holding. While the language of MCL 500.3157 speaks of a clinic or institution lawfully rendering treatment, treatment is invariably and necessarily performed or rendered by employees and personnel; the treatment itself has nothing to do with corporate formation issues.”
(emphasis in original)
