Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 240390; Unpublished
Judges Smolenski, Murphy, and Wilder; unanimous; per curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not applicable, Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Not applicable
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Uninsured Motorist Benefits: Notice and Statute of Limitations for Uninsured Motorist Coverage
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous unpublished per curiam opinion, the Court of Appeals upheld dismissal of plaintiff’s claim for uninsured motorist benefits on the basis that the plaintiff had failed to comply with the policy provisions requiring notification to the insurance company of the claim within 30 days of the accident.
Plaintiff was involved in a hit-and-run accident on October 9, 1998. Plaintiff reported the accident to the police. Plaintiff later developed shoulder problems which required surgery. Some time after June, 2000, Plaintiff filed a claim for uninsured motorist benefits with Farmers Insurance. Farmers denied the claim on the ground that the policy required that a person claiming uninsured benefits must notify the insurance company "within 30 days if a hit and run motorist is involved and an uninsured motorist claim is to be filed."
On appeal from the trial court grant of summary disposition in favor of Farmers, the Court of Appeals held that the language of the policy is clear and unambiguous. Uninsured motorist coverage is not mandated by statute. Therefore, the scope of such coverage is governed by the language of the policy itself and by contract law. The court rejected plaintiff’s argument that defendant was not prejudiced by the delay in making the claim and that the notice provision in the policy was ambiguous and contrary to public policy.
