Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 180623 and 180735; Unpublished
Judges Gribbs, MacKenzie, and Griffin; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
12% Interest Penalty on Overdue Benefits – Nature and Scope [§3142(2), (3)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Civil Judgments and Interest (MCL 600.6013)
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unpublished per curiam Opinion in a no-fault first party benefits case, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's rulings on interest, taxable costs and attorney fees with respect to a judgment that entered in favor of the plaintiff.
Plaintiff had a number of health problems associated with injuries sustained in an automobile accident. The defendant insurance company denied payment of certain medical and work loss benefits on the grounds that such were related to pre-existing conditions of plaintiff. The trial court granted a directed verdict in favor of plaintiff on a number of the contested expenses, with additional amounts being awarded by the jury.
Plaintiff challenged a remark made by defense counsel during closing argument that the trial judge had given little credence to plaintiffs claims going to the jury by virtue of its denial of a directed verdict on those charges. However, the Court of Appeals found that, in fact, defense counsel was responding to plaintiffs counsel's closing commentary and, therefore, plaintiff could not predicate error on those statements.
Plaintiff also challenged the trial court's denial of her motion for directed verdict regarding entitlement to 12% penalty interest under §3142 on the covered expenses for which directed verdict had been granted. However, the jury ultimately awarded plaintiff penalty interest on the full amount of the benefits, including the amounts awarded by the court with its directed verdict. Therefore, the Court of Appeals found that any error in this regard was harmless.
Defendant insurance company challenged the trial court's award of taxable costs to plaintiff when a portion of those costs were for claims that ultimately were not proven at trial. The Court of Appeals affirmed, however, based on its prior decision of McMillan v Auto Club Insurance Association, 195 Mich App 463; 491 NW2d 593 (1992) (Item No. 1712), holding that the total costs were awardable even if the recipient party does not prevail on every aspect of its case.
Finally, the Court of Appeals held that the trial court did not err in awarding plaintiff taxable costs pursuant to §2549 of the Revised Judicature Act with regard to two expenses associated with two depositions read into the record at trial. Defendant claimed that costs should not be awarded because the depositions were only relevant to moot and uncontested issues. However, the Court of Appeals found that the statute unambiguously provides for payment of deposition costs, without regard to whether the deposition testimony was relevant to contested issues.
