Borgess Medical Center v. Resto
| Decision Date | 01 August 2008 |
| Docket Number | Docket No. 133223.,COA No. 270773. |
| Citation | 482 Mich. 946,754 N.W.2d 321 |
| Parties | BORGESS MEDICAL CENTER, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan RESTO, Defendant, and Southern Michigan Insurance Company, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
By order of October 3, 2007, the application for leave to appeal the January 9, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals was held in abeyance pending the decision in Ross v. Auto Club Group (Docket No. 130917). On order of the Court, the case having been decided on May 7, 2008, 481 Mich. 1, 748 N.W.2d 552 (2008), the application is again considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we VACATE the majority opinion in Borgess Medical Center v. Resto, 273 Mich.App. 558, 730 N.W.2d 738 (2007), and AFFIRM the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the reasons stated in the concurring opinion. The motion for leave to file brief amicus curiae by Phu Tran et al. is GRANTED.
To continue reading
Request your trial
5 cases
-
Wyo. Chiropractic Health Clinic, PC v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co.
...concurring opinion did not discuss whether the plaintiff had standing to sue.41 Therefore, this Court cannot rely on the majority opinion in Resto I.Recently, this Court reiterated the fact that the no-fault act creates an independent cause of action for healthcare providers when it stated,......
-
Griffin v. Trumbull Ins. Co.
..., 273 Mich. App. 558, 568-576, 730 N.W.2d 738 (2007), vacated on other grounds and judgment and concurring opinion affirmed 482 Mich. 946, 754 N.W.2d 321 (2008).2 If any standard for determining when or how a higher-priority insurer "cannot be identified" is to be crafted, it would ideally ......
-
Detroit Med. Ctr. v. Encompass Ins. Co., Case No. 09-14821
...Med. Ctr. v. Resto, 273 Mich. App. 558, 579, 730 N.W.2d 738, 750 (2007), opinion vacated, concurrence & judgment aff'd, 482 Mich. 946, 754 N.W.2d 321 (2008) ("Once a claimant provides reasonable proof of the fact and amount of the loss, the insurer has a duty to conduct its own investigatio......
- People v. Kilpatrick, Docket No. 136835.
Request a trial to view additional results