Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 49041; Published
Judges Walsh, R. B. Burns, and D. E. Holbrook, Jr.; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 124 Mich App 454; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
One-Year Notice Rule Limitation [§3145(1)]
Required Content of Notice / Sufficiency of Notice [§3145(1)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Legislative Purpose and Intent
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous per curiam Opinion, the Court held that a notice of claim for workers' compensation benefits made to an employer's workers' compensation carrier does not constitute "notice of injury" within the meaning of §3145(1) of the No-Fault Act where the workers' compensation carrier is also the employer's no-fault insurer. In so holding, the Court reasoned that the purpose of the no-fault notice provision was to provide an insurer time to investigate and to appropriate funds for settlement purposes. The Court stated, "The accomplishment of this legislative purpose requires that the insurer be alerted to the probability that a claim would be filed under die policy. Mere notice of an injury under circumstances unrelated to a possible claim for benefits will not serve to trigger the insurer's investigative procedures nor advise the insurer of the need to appropriate funds for settlement."
