Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 109108; Published
Judges Cynar, Cavanagh, and N.J. Kaufman; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 180 Mich App 479; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Allowable Expenses for Medical Transportation Mileage [§3107(1)(a)]
Allowable Expenses: Reasonable Charge Requirement [§3107(1)(a)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous published, per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court grant of summary disposition in favor of State Farm regarding plaintiff’s claim for allowable expenses to reimburse for travel costs incurred in obtaining medical treatment.
State Farm reimburses claimants for the actual costs of medically related travel, assuming the costs are documented and are otherwise reasonable. Where the claimant provides no proof of actual travel costs, State Farm pays at the rate of 9 cents per mile. In this case, plaintiff reported his mileage without submitting any evidence of actual travel costs, so the defendant State Farm, reimbursed at the standard rate of 9 cents per mile. Plaintiff commenced suit claiming he had not been sufficiently reimbursed for his travel expenses. State Farm filed a motion for summary disposition supported by affidavits and evidentiary material, which indicated that plaintiffs actual expenses amounted to only 7.96 cents per mile. The trial court denied plaintiff’s request to delay entry of a decision pending further additional discovery and granted defendant State Farm's motion.
On appeal, the court upheld the trial court's decision and ruled that the trial court did not err in granting the defendant's motion prior to the close of discovery. It did not appear that additional discovery would have produced factual support for plaintiff’s position.
The Court of Appeals also rejected plaintiff’s contention that the formula used by the trial court in calculating travel expenses was incorrect as a matter of law. Section 3107 of the No-Fault Act requires reimbursement of reasonable transportation expenses incurred for the purpose of obtaining medical treatment. The Court of Appeals upheld the trial court's interpretation of §3107(a) as allowing only for travel expenses actually incurred by the claimant. Plaintiff failed to show with any degree of certainty that his laundry list of expenses were, or would be, actually incurred by him.
