Experience, expertise and common sense.

Cukani v State Auto

Motor Vehicle Litigation / June 2, 2023

Court/Case No: Macomb County Circuit Court I 22-000932-NF

Tried/Argued Before: Judge



Name of Judge(s): Hon. Julie Gatti

Keys to the Case:

Plaintiff claimed to require attendant care performed by her parents, between 16 to 24 hours per day for 10 months as a result of her injuries. MCL 500.3157(10) as amended on June 11, 2019, applies the hourly limitation contained in the Workers’ Disability Compensation Act limiting attendant care performed by relatives in the injured person’s home to 56 hours per week.

While Plaintiff’s counsel did not disagree that the attendant care claims were limited in this PIP case, he argued that attendant care over and above 56 hours per week would be claimed as excess economic damages pursuant to MCL 500.3135(3)(c). We argued that allowable expenses are specifically defined in MCL 500.3107 and are “subject to the exceptions and limitations in this chapter.” As such, the limitation in MCL 500.3157 is not a “daily, monthly, or 3-year limitation” contained in MCL 500.3107 to 3010, thus any attendant care in excess of 56 hours a week is not defined as an allowable expense. The Court agreed based on the clear language of the statutes and granted our motion to dismiss all excess attendant care expenses in Plaintiff’s PIP and UM claims. This is an issue of first impression as there is no case law directly on point.

Defense SW attorney(s) Involved in Case:


Quality legal representation is the result of knowledge, economy & hard work

Best Law Firms - 2024