Genesee County Circuit Court; Docket No. 45326; Unpublished
Judge Donald R. Freeman
Official Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
One-Year Back Rule Limitation [§3145(1)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
MCL 600.5852 – Tolling of Statute of Limitations During Appointment of Personal Representative
Revised Judicature Act – Tolling of Statutes of Limitations (MCL 600.5851 – 600.5856)
CASE SUMMARY:
In a written Opinion, Judge Freeman made two significant rulings regarding statute of limitation questions under Michigan's no-fault statute. First, Judge Freeman held that §3145(1) of the no-fault statute is tolled by the general savings provisions of MCLA 600.5852. Accordingly, where the decedent, as in this case, died before or within 30 days after the one year statute of limitations contained in §3145, the general savings provision of MCLA 600.5852 extends the time for filing a suit for an additional two years after the grant of "letters testamentary." Since plaintiff commenced his action against the no-fault carrier within the time allowed by MCLA 600.5852, the fact that plaintiff’s administrator did not make formal application for no-fault benefits within the one year period as required by §3145 of the no-fault act is no impediment to the estate's claim for no-fault benefits.
Second, Judge Freeman ruled that on the basis of Richards v American Fellowship (item number 101) a no-fault insurance company is under a duty to provide the insured with prompt and adequate compensation or deny a claim as soon as is reasonably practicable. In this particular case, Judge Freeman held that Progressive Casualty was given sufficient notice of the loss to enable it to assess their liability and process the no-fault claim. The evidence disclosed that Progressive Casualty knew of the existence of a claim under the no-fault law, knew its approximate value, was provided with medical bills, a death certificate, and a funeral bill which it paid, and that it received a bill from a treating neurosurgeon within a month of the accident in question. Judge Freeman held that it is well settled in Michigan that a person is chargeable with constructive notice "when he has the means of knowledge and does not use them." Accordingly, because the no-fault carrier had possession of sufficient information to put it on inquiry and it knew where to direct its inquiry, it should not be permitted to plead the statute of limitations in avoidance of this claim.
