Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 119149; Unpublished
Judges McDonald, MacKenzie, and Weaver; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Penalty Attorney Fees and Other Court Rule Sanctions [§3148]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals held that where a lawsuit seeking recovery of unpaid no-fault expenses as well as declaratory relief as to future expenses proceeds to mediation and results in a mediation evaluation that is accepted by both plaintiff and defendant, the acceptance of mediation results in a dismissal of not only that portion of the lawsuit seeking money damages for unpaid PIP benefits, but also that portion of the suit that seeks declaratory relief as to future expenses.
The court cited the recent amendment to the mediation court rule, MCR 2.403(M)(1), which specifically states: “That if all parties accept a mediation evaluation, the judgment shall be deemed to dispose of all claims in the action." However, the court held that the judgment entered pursuant to the mediation acceptance would not preclude a future claim for damages and declaratory relief pursuant to the Supreme Court's opinion in Manley v DAIIE (Item No. 908) should a dispute arise as to the no-fault insurer's obligation to pay for expenses incurred after the entry of the judgment.
In reaching its decision, the court emphasized the fact that lawsuits seeking declaratory relief regarding an insurer's obligation to pay future no-fault benefits are "not well suited for mediation."
