Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 48839; Unpublished
Judges Holbrook, Branson, and Walsh; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
One-Year Notice Rule Limitation [§3145(1)]
Tolling of Limitations for Minors [§3145(1)]
When Claimants Can Receive PIP Benefits Through the Assigned Claims Facility [§3172(1)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Revised Judicature Act – Tolling of Statutes of Limitations (MCL 600.5851 – 600.5856)
CASE SUMMARY:
In a per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals rejected dicta in Home Insurance Company v Rosquin (item number 203) to the effect that the statute of limitations period set forth in §3145(1) of the No-Fault Act might not be applied where the appropriate insurance companies were not discovered prior to the expiration of the limitations period even though reasonable diligence had been exercised. In disagreeing with this dicta, the Court of Appeals stated that where an injured plaintiff has difficulty in identifying the proper no-fault insurance company, the plaintiff should immediately proceed under the Assigned Claims Plan. Section 3172 of the Plan provides that if no PIP benefits applicable to the injury can be identified, the person entitled to no-fault benefits can seek them through the Assigned Claims Plan. Therefore, the assertion that an insurance company could not be reasonably identified, will not toll the running of the statute of limitations.
The Court also agreed with the holding in Rawlins v Aetna Casualty (item number 230) that the general savings provisions of the RJA apply to a minor's cause of action for no-fault benefits under the statute. However, in order for these general savings provisions to be applicable, the record must reflect that the claimant was a minor at the appropriate time. This required a remand to determine additional facts.
