Bill v. Northwestern Nat. Life Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 10 July 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 76827,76827 |
| Citation | 389 N.W.2d 863,425 Mich. 877 |
| Parties | Peter BILL, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant. 425 Mich. 877, 389 N.W.2d 863 |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
Prior report: 143 Mich.App. 766, 373 N.W.2d 214.
On order of the Court, the motions for leave to file briefs amicus curiae are considered, and they are GRANTED.
The application for leave to appeal is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
LEVIN, J., would grant leave to appeal and states:
The group disability policy issued by the defendant insurer to the plaintiff's employer, a school district, contains a provision, found in many such policies, providing for coordination of benefits.
The Court of Appeals held that reduction of the disability benefit otherwise payable to the plaintiff by the amount of the social security disability benefit payable to him, pursuant to the coordination of benefits provision in the policy, is violative of the Insurance Code because the insurer failed to file a copy of the policy with the Commissioner of Insurance and obtain the commissioner's approval as provided by the code. It appears, however, that the commissioner exempted employer group policies from such filing and approval requirement, and would have refused, because of such exemption, to have reviewed or approved the policy issued by the insurer to plaintiff's employer had the insurer filed the policy with the commissioner and sought such approval.
A reduced premium was charged to plaintiff's employer or enlarged benefits were payable by the insurer by reason of the provision for coordination of benefits.
Coordination of benefits is not violative of the public policy of this state. The provision in the policy for coordination of policy benefits with social security disability benefits parallels provisions of statutes enacted by the Legislature and by the Congress. The coordination of benefits provision in the policy would, it appears, have been approved by the commissioner had employer group policies not been exempted from filing and the commissioner would then have been willing to review a policy filing containing such a provision.
The questions whether the commissioner was authorized to exempt employer group policies from filing, and the consequences to insurers and insureds if it were to be determined by this Court that the commissioner was not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gooden v. Transamerica Ins. Corp. of America
...500.3106; M.S.A. § 24.13106; Harkins v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co., 149 Mich.App. 98, 100, 385 N.W.2d 741 (1986), lv. den. 425 Mich. 877 (1986). However, several statutory exceptions exist to this "parked vehicle exclusion" which permit recovery. One of these exceptions is where ......
-
Ruble v. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of America
...social security benefits. (See Bill v. Northwestern Nat'l Life Ins. Co., 143 Mich.App. 766, 373 N.W.2d 214 (1985), lv. den., 425 Mich. 877, 389 N.W.2d 863 (1986), quoting portions of the Michigan Insurance Code as in effect prior to a 1987 amendment.) Mr. Ruble's complaint, which did not pu......
-
Kouri v. Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of US
...Plaintiff relies on Bill v. Northwestern National Life Insurance Co., 143 Mich.App. 766, 373 N.W.2d 214 (1985) lv. denied, 425 Mich. 877, 389 N.W.2d 863 (1986), reh. denied, 425 Mich. 878 (1986), in which the Michigan Court of Appeals held that M.C. L.A. § 500.3440 prohibited the defendant ......
-
Sherlund by Sherlund v. Lincoln Nat. Life Ins. Co., 88-1585
...Laws Sec. 500.3468(2); Bill v. Northwestern Nat'l Life Ins. Co., 143 Mich.App. 766, 373 N.W.2d 214 (1985), app. denied, 425 Mich. 877, 389 N.W.2d 863 (1986). As we have already concluded, the Lincoln coordination of benefits clause does not conflict with Michigan law and is therefore valid ......