Gobler v. Auto-Owners Insurance (1987)
green
· 107 citation events
across 4 courts.
Showing the 8 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1987 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
198720062026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
Jimkoski v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance (2007)
Co., 428 Mich. 51 , 404 N.W.2d 199, 205-06 (1987) (“[A] refusal or delay in payments by an insurer will not be found ‘unreasonable’ within the meaning of § 3148 where the delay is the product of ... a bona fide factual uncertainty.”).
“[A] refusal or delay in payments by an insurer will not be found ‘unreasonable’ within the meaning of § 3148 where the delay is the product of ... a bona fide factual uncertainty.”
green
Villaflor v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance (2009)
Co., 428 Mich. 51 , 404 N.W.2d 199, 205-06 (1987); see also Moore, 759 N.W.2d at 843 (“[A]n insurer’s initial refusal to pay no-fault benefits can be deemed reasonable even if it is later determined that the insurer was required to pay those benefits.”). 13 .
green
Willie Griffin v. Trumbull Insurance Company (2022)
See also Gobler v Auto-Owners Ins Co, 428 Mich 51, 61 ; 404 NW2d 199 (1987); Walega v Walega, 312 Mich App 259, 266 ; 877 NW2d 910 (2015); Churchman v Rickerson, 240 Mich App 223, 228 ; 611 NW2d 333 (2000). 8 Following a motor vehicle accident, MCL 500.3114 4 instructs a person to pursue his or her “claim” for PIP benefits from insurers according to the listed order of priority.
green
Willie Griffin v. Trumbull Insurance Company (2022)
See also Gobler v Auto-Owners Ins Co, 428 Mich 51, 61 ; 404 NW2d 199 (1987); Walega v Walega, 312 Mich App 259, 266 ; 877 NW2d 910 (2015); Churchman v Rickerson, 240 Mich App 223, 228 ; 611 NW2d 333 (2000). 8 Following a motor vehicle accident, MCL 500.3114 4 instructs a person to pursue his or her “claim” for PIP benefits from insurers according to the listed order of priority.
green
Willie Griffin v. Trumbull Insurance Company (2022)
See also Gobler v Auto-Owners Ins Co, 428 Mich 51, 61 ; 404 NW2d 199 (1987); Walega v Walega, 312 Mich App 259, 266 ; 877 NW2d 910 (2015); Churchman v Rickerson, 240 Mich App 223, 228 ; 611 NW2d 333 (2000). 8 Following a motor vehicle accident, MCL 500.3114 4 instructs a person to pursue his or her “claim” for PIP benefits from insurers according to the listed order of priority.
green
Timmie Dewight Collins Jr v. Vincent Michael Nizzi (2022)
Second, the trial court must determine if the insurer “unreasonably refused to pay the claim or unreasonably delayed in making proper payment.” Id. “[A]n insurer’s refusal to pay benefits is not unreasonable [i]f the insurer’s refusal or delay in payment is the product of a legitimate question of statutory construction, constitutional law, or a bona fide factual uncertainty.” Id. at 520 (quotation marks and citation omitted); see also Gobler v Auto-Owners Ins Co, 428 Mich 51…
See also Johnson, 491 Mich at 433 . -13- Although the no-fault act has been characterized as remedial in nature, see, e.g., Gobler v Auto-Owners Ins Co, 428 Mich 51, 61 ; 404 NW2d 199 (1987), we find that the amendment to § 3107(1) should not apply retroactively.
green
Spencer v. Citizens Insurance (2000)
“The no-fault act is remedial in nature and is to be liberally construed in favor of persons who are intended to benefit from it.” Putkamer v Transamerica Ins Corp of *301 America, 454 Mich 626, 631 ; 563 NW2d 683 (1997); see also Gobler v Auto-Owners Ins Co, 428 Mich 51, 61 ; 404 NW2d 199 (1987).