Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 55825; Published
Judges Kelly, Cavanagh, and Joslyn; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 123 Mich App 626; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
One-Year Notice Rule Limitation [§3145(1)]
Who May Give Notice [§3145(1)]
Required Content of Notice / Sufficiencyof Notice [§3145(1)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals held that an employer (here, the City of Flint Police Department) did not owe a duty to an employee (a patrol officer), injured while driving an employer's vehicle, to notify the employer's no-fault carrier that the employee had a claim for first party no-fault benefits. The Court held that §3145(1) strictly provides that notice of injury may be given to an insurer "by a person claiming to be entitled to benefits therefore, or by someone on his behalf." The purpose of this provision is to encourage claimants to bring their claims to court while those claims are still fresh. The Court stated that, "To hold that mere notice from whatever source, of an accident which would possibly give rise to a claim for benefits by a non-insured is sufficient would, we think, thwart this legislative purpose." Therefore, the employer owed no duty to file the claim for PEP benefits on plaintiff’s behalf. In reaching its conclusion, the Court distinguished the opinion in Lansing General Hospital v Gomez (item number 518) on the basis that the holding in that case was based on "unique facts."
Pursuant to the Court's reasoning, plaintiff’s claim for no-fault benefits was dismissed under §3145(1) for failure to comply with the one year notice provision.
