Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No102398; Unpublished
Judges Cynar, Shepherd, and Kelly; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Not Applicable
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Insurance Agents (Duty to Insured)
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals affirmed judgment in favor of plaintiff on a claim that defendant had "negligently failed to provide uninsured motorist coverage in a policy where plaintiff had requested 'full coverage.’" (See Item No. 1052 summarizing the circuit court opinion.)
Plaintiff was injured in a hit-and-run automobile accident and sought uninsured motorist benefits. The defendant denied coverage because plaintiff had failed to purchase uninsured motorist coverage. Following a bench trial, the trial court entered judgment in favor of plaintiff on a theory of negligence on the part of the defendant to provide "full coverage" when requested. Testimony established that a "reasonably prudent insurance salesman, when asked to provide full coverage, would include uninsured motorist coverage."
The Court of Appeals also affirmed an award of mediation sanctions, even though the parties had stipulated that if the trial court found that coverage existed, the damages would be $20,000. The mediation sanction rules authorize sanctions anytime a party has rejected an evaluation and failed to improve its position at trial. Since the stipulation to the amount of damages did not constitute a settlement or a consent judgment, the Court of Appeals found that the trial court did not err in awarding mediation sanctions and interest on the judgment.
