Michigan Supreme Court Confirms Exception to No-Fault Notice Deadline

Michigan car accident victims have won a victory that they might not even know about. On March 21, 2016, the Michigan Supreme Court acknowledged there is an exception to the statute of limitations for filing a claim for PIP benefits.

When people think about the perils of court cases, the usual things that come to mind are making the kind of closing argument that leaves a jury speechless or the unexpected piece of evidence that destroys a case like a house of cards. Well lawyers know that with court cases, time can be your deadliest enemy. Statutes of limitation limit the time in which court actions can be taken. Otherwise, after all, companies and individuals might need to look over their shoulders without end for a claim to be filed against them. However, it too often happens that someone is injured and unfortunately does not know the deadline will affect them.

Michigan Supreme Court Ruling Gives Life to Exception the Legal Community Had Disagreed Over

Jesperson v. Auto Club Insurance Association allows a claimant a little more leeway in filing. Before, most people thought that there was only a notice requirement for the one-year statute of limitations to filing a claim for PIP benefits against an insurance company. You must provide notice of a PIP claim to an insurance company within one year of the accident. However, there is an additional clause in the statute that some have claimed amounts to an exception to this limit.

Most people did not agree. In fact, the trial court and the Court of Appeals did not agree. The Michigan Supreme Court felt differently, however. It did think that there was a second clause that had real meaning providing for an exception if an insurance company made any payments "previously." This did not mean making payments previous to the one-year statute of limitation running out. It meant, said the court: ever. If the company makes a payment, even after the one-year limit passes, then the claimant can file suit. The opposing side had always said this could not be what the statute intended because it would lead to an absurd result that would negate the statute of limitations altogether. However, there are still other rules that would curtail the reach of such an exception so that it would not be as wide sweeping as critics might believe.

What Does Jesperson v. ACIA Mean for Michigan Car Accident Victims?

What this means for Michigan residents is that victims of car, truck, and motorcycle accidents potentially have more time in which to file their claims. At bottom, this case was about statutory construction, how the court construed the language of a statute. But the real-world meaning is a bit of leniency on the public and a victory for those suffering from crash injuries.

Our Detroit, Michigan Law Firm: Always Steps Ahead of the Rest

Sachs Waldman personal injury attorneys are fearless litigators in the courtroom, tireless advocates at the negotiation table, and insightful advisers with their clients. Contact one of our experienced Detroit Michigan lawyers today at (313) 965-3464 or fill out our online form. You and your loved ones rest assured knowing our attorneys keep up with the latest legal developments so we can try to develop best legal plan and strategies for your case.