Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 78557; Unpublished
Judges Gribbs, MacKenzie, and Gage; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
One-Year Notice Rule Limitation [§3145(1)]
Required Content of Notice / Sufficiency of Notice [§3145(1)]
Tolling of Limitations Upon Submission of Claim [§3145]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Workers Disability Compensation Act (MCL 418.1, et seq.)
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's denial of no-fault benefits on the basis that the statute of limitations contained in §3145 barred the claim. Plaintiff was injured in a work-related accident and drew workers' compensation benefits. The defendant was the plaintiff’s workers' comp carrier, as well as the prospective no-fault insurer. Plaintiff did not claim no-fault benefits until filing suit some four years after the accident. Relying upon the Supreme Court's recent decision in Welton v Carriers (Item No. 801), the court held that the tolling of the statute of limitations does not begin until a claim for specific no-fault benefits is submitted to the insurer. A workers' compensation claim does not constitute a specific claim for no-fault benefits. Furthermore, the court rejected plaintiff’s argument that defendant was estopped from raising the statute of limitations defense on the basis that defendant's adjuster allegedly told plaintiff that "he could receive no other benefits.” The court stated that this statement was not sufficient conduct which was clearly designed to induce plaintiff to refrain from bringing action within the period fixed by statute. Furthermore, there was insufficient evidence that plaintiff reasonably relied on the adjuster's statement in relationship to his no-fault claim. Therefore, defendant was not estopped from raising the statute of limitations defense.
