Posts by svertel@secrestwardle.com
Secrest Wardle MI PIP Monthly – May 2026 Update
Secrest Wardle MI PIP Monthly – April 2026 Update
Supreme Court Provides Guidance on Relevant Inquiry for “Unlawful Taking” of Motor Vehicles Pursuant to MCL 500.313(a)
In Swoope v Citizens Ins Co, the Michigan Supreme Court distilled MCL 500.3113(a)’s rule that bars eligibility for PIP benefits where a vehicle in use was “taken unlawfully,” to limit its application to only where the taking of the vehicle was unlawful, as opposed to potential unlawful use of the vehicle itself. The Court’s interpretation…
Read MoreCourt Dismissed First-Party and UM/UIM Claims Under Commercial Policy’s Terms
Defense Limits Liability to $10K in Police Cruiser Collision Despite Claims of Severe Injury
More Than a Puddle Required: The Importance of Notice in Premises Liability
This decision emphasizes that in premises liability cases, the plaintiff bears the burden of providing evidence that a dangerous condition existed and that the owner or occupier had actual or constructive notice of the hazard. Simply showing that a dangerous condition existed is not enough to survive a motion for summary disposition. For defendants,…
Read MoreAmbulance Collision Case Dismissed: Defense Proves No Serious Impairment of Body Function
Michigan Court of Appeals Reinforces Serious Impairment Standard: A Picture is NOT Worth a Thousand Words
The Court of Appeals’ decision in Jones v Hammons prompts liability carriers to argue that plaintiffs must do more than present MRIs, CT scans, or diagnostic wordsmanship to meet the serious impairment threshold. From a defense perspective, the decision preserves McCormick and its progeny as vital, but Jones reinforces that plaintiffs cannot satisfy the statute…
Read More