Someone Has to Pay: MAIPF Held Liable for Directly Paying PIP Benefits Where a Servicing Insurer Has Not Been Assigned

The Court of Appeals’ reversal of the trial court clarified that a Plaintiff may seek PIP benefits from MAIPF directly where MAIPF has not assigned the claim to a servicing insurer. The Court further ruled that Plaintiffs’ complaints did sufficiently allege that MAIPF breached its statutory duty to assign an insurer, and therefore adequately put MAIPF on notice of their claims. In denying Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to amend, the trial court abused its discretion in its denial of leave on the sole basis of delay, as such a conclusion was unsupported by the record where counsel had provided a reasonable explanation for the delay.

To access the full article: http://bit.ly/2QKFwwZ