Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 53183; Published
Judges Gillis, Beasley, and Deegan; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 115 Mich App 191; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Not Applicable
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Revised Judicature Act – Miscellaneous Provisions
CASE SUMMARY:
In a unanimous per curiam Opinion regarding an issue of first impression, the Court of Appeals held that the Circuit Court had the power to consolidate a case pending in the Common Pleas Court against the defendant insurance company for payment of no-fault benefits with the instant action which was filed in the Circuit Court when the plaintiff’s claim for PIP benefits exceeded the $10,000 jurisdictional limitation of the Common Pleas Court In this case, the plaintiff filed her claim for PIP coverage in the Common Pleas Court because, at the time of filing, the plaintiff’s wage loss claim did not exceed the $10,000 minimum jurisdiction of the Circuit Court However, by the time the Common Pleas case reached trial, the wage loss claim was well in excess of the $10,000 Common Pleas maximum. At that point, the plaintiff filed a claim in Circuit Court and sought to have the two actions consolidated. The Circuit Court held that it did not have the authority to consolidate a case from another court and dismissed the Circuit Court case on the basis that another action regarding the same subject matter was pending in Common Pleas Court
The Court of Appeals reversed and held that, "The unique jurisdictional problem created by the scheme of the No-Fault Act mandates consolidation." The Court reasoned that PIP claimants should not "be placed in a position in which they must choose their forum based upon a guess at how quickly the court's docket will move. Nor should their right to receive complete relief under the No-Fault Act depend on defense counsel's agreement or refusal to stipulate to consolidation." The Court noted that its opinion should not be taken as general authorization for consolidation of cases in different courts other than cases involving PIP benefits. The Court stated, "Consolidation must be made available to claimant's of PIP benefits until such time as the legislature remedies the situation."
