THE INSURANCE CODE OF 1956
Act 218 of 1956
500.3112 Persons to whom personal protection insurance benefits payable; claim to recover overdue benefits; discharge of insurer's liability.
Sec. 3112.
Personal protection insurance benefits are payable to or for the benefit of an injured person or, in case of his or her death, to or for the benefit of his or her dependents. A health care provider listed in section 3157 may make a claim and assert a direct cause of action against an insurer, or under the assigned claims plan under sections 3171 to 3175, to recover overdue benefits payable for charges for products, services, or accommodations provided to an injured person. Payment by an insurer in good faith of personal protection insurance benefits, to or for the benefit of a person who it believes is entitled to the benefits, discharges the insurer's liability to the extent of the payments unless the insurer has been notified in writing of the claim of some other person. If there is doubt about the proper person to receive the benefits or the proper apportionment among the persons entitled to the benefits, the insurer, the claimant, or any other interested person may apply to the circuit court for an appropriate order. The court may designate the payees and make an equitable apportionment, taking into account the relationship of the payees to the injured person and other factors as the court considers appropriate. In the absence of a court order directing otherwise the insurer may pay:
(a) To the dependents of the injured person, the personal protection insurance benefits accrued before his or her death without appointment of an administrator or executor.
(b) To the surviving spouse, the personal protection insurance benefits due any dependent children living with the spouse.
History: Add. 1972, Act 294, Eff. Mar. 30, 1973 ;-- Am. 2019, Act 21, Imd. Eff. June 11, 2019
Compiler's Notes:
Enacting section 1 of Act 21 of 2019 provides:
"Enacting section 1. Section 3112 of the insurance code of 1956, 1956 PA 218, MCL 500.3112, as amended by this amendatory act, applies to products, services, or accommodations provided after the effective date of this amendatory act."
PopularName Notes:
Act 218
PopularName Notes:
Essential Insurance
PopularName Notes:
No-Fault Insurance
Notes of Decisions
W a Foote Mem'l Hosp. v. Michigan Assigned Claims Plan, 909 N.W.2d 38 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 16× “THE COVENANT DECISION MCL 500.3112 states in pertinent part that “[p]ersonal protection insurance benefits are payable to or for the benefit of an injured person or, in case of his death, to or for the benefit of his dependents.”
Allstate Ins. Co v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co, 909 N.W.2d 495 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 9× “MCL 500.3112. This provision provides, in part: Personal protection insurance benefits are payable to or for the benefit of an injured person or, in case of his death, to or for the benefit of his dependents.”
Ali Bazzi v. Sentinel Ins. Co., 919 N.W.2d 20 (Mich. 2018).
· cites it 4× “" MCL 500.3112. Because "PIP benefits are mandated by statute under the no-fault act, .”
Dawoud v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 317 Mich. App. 517 (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 6× “The service providers rely only on MCL 500.3112 and Wyoming Chiropractic Health Clinic, PC v Auto-Owners Ins Co, 308 Mich App 389 ; 864 NW2d 598 (2014), to support their argument that the lower court’s decision should be reversed.”
Chiropractors Rehab. Grp., PC v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 313 Mich. App. 113 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 8× “) 2 Similarly, a healthcare provider’s right to reimbursement for medical expenses in a first-party no-fault action is evident in the statutory language of MCL 500.3112, *124 especially when the language is considered in context with MCL 500.”
Miller v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins., 302 N.W.2d 537 (Mich. 1981).
· cites it 4× “13110; for a "safe" method of payment of benefits by insurers, MCL 500.3112; MSA 24.13112; and for prompt access to earnings records of an injured person in order to facilitate determination of the amount of benefits due, MCL 500.”
Henry Ford Health Sys. v. Everest Nat'l Ins. Co., 927 N.W.2d 717 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 2× “Furthermore, MCL 500.3112 contemplates that an insurer may discharge its obligation to the insured with respect to particular benefits that have been incurred by directing payment of those benefits to the party providing services to the injured party.”
Covenant Med. Ctr., Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 880 N.W.2d 294 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 5× “On appeal, Covenant Medical argues that because it provided written notice to State Farm regarding the medical services provided to Stockford, it is entitled to pursue the $43,484.”
Michigan Head & Spine Inst., PC v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins., 830 N.W.2d 781 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 4× “116(0(10), arguing that the release did not bar its independent cause of action against defendant for the recoupment of no-fault benefits pursuant to MCL 500.3112. In response, defendant moved for summary disposition under MCR 2.”
Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Compass Healthcare Plc, 928 N.W.2d 726 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 2× “” MCL 500.3112. This means, as is undisputed, that the no-fault act allows an injured person to bring suit against an appropriate insurer for benefits due under the act.”
Lakeland Neurocare Centers v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins., 645 N.W.2d 59 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 3× “” MCL 500.3112 provides, in pertinent part: Personal protection insurance benefits are payable to or for the benefit of an injured person or, in the case of his death, to or for the benefit of his dependents.”
Belcher v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 293 N.W.2d 594 (Mich. 1980).
· cites it 3× “MCL 500.3112; MSA 24.13112 provides in part: "Personal protection insurance benefits are payable to or for the benefit of an injured person or, in case of his death, to or for the benefit of his dependents.”
Miller v. Citizens Ins., 794 N.W.2d 622 (Mich. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 4× “Plaintiff further requested that, pursuant to the equitable provisions of MCL 500.3112, the DMC receive only $66,200, which was the same amount that the DMC would have received from Medicaid.”
In re City of Detroit, 548 B.R. 748 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 2016).
· cites it 2× “at 601 (emphasis added) (citing Mich. Comp. Laws § 500.3112 ). Thus, while the providers may bring a direct action, they are only entitled to recover whatever the accident victims themselves are entitled to recover.”
Begin v. Michigan Bell Tel. Co., 773 N.W.2d 271 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 2× “Plaintiff's counsel at that time wrote White a letter dated May 10, 2005, requesting reconsideration of the determination regarding the method of paying no-fault attendant care benefits, specifically citing MCL 500.3112 and no-fault caselaw, as reasons for doing so.”
Borgess Med. Ctr. v. Resto, 730 N.W.2d 738 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 4× “The Court reasoned that MCL 500.3112 contemplates the payment of PIP benefits to someone other than the injured person and that a provider of health-care to a person injured in an automobile accident is a no-fault "claimant" entitled to seek penalty interest for overdue…”
Clevenger v. Allstate Ins., 505 N.W.2d 553 (Mich. 1993).
· cites it 2× “13111 (PIP benefits for out-of-state accidents); MCL 500.3112; MSA 24.13112 (payees of PIP benefits); MCL 500.”
Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Starkey, 323 N.W.2d 325 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982).
· cites it 2× “Counsel for defendant made a motion for partial summary judgment under the provisions of MCL 500.3112; MSA 24.13112, seeking payment by Aetna of two-thirds of the amount of its billing to each medical provider and the other one-third to defendant’s counsel.”
Moody v. Home Owners Ins., 304 Mich. App. 415 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
“Indeed, it is Moody’s claim against Home Owners that the providers are allowed to assert because the no-fault act states that “benefits are payable to or for the benefit of an injured person,” MCL 500.3112. See Lakeland Neurocare Ctrs, 250 Mich App at 38-40 .”
Hatcher v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins., 712 N.W.2d 744 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006).
“However, MCL 500.3112 provides in part, “Personal protection insurance benefits are payable to or for the benefit of an injured person .”
Geiger v. Detroit Auto. Inter-Ins. Exch., 318 N.W.2d 833 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982).
“According to defendant, the cause of action belongs to plaintiff’s mother, who, as legal guardian, was legally responsible for the medical expenses.”
Belcher v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 268 N.W.2d 349 (Mich. Ct. App. 1978).
· cites it 2× “MCL 500.3112; MSA 24.13112 commences by stating: "Personal protection insurance benefits are payable to or for the benefit of an injured person or, in case of his death, to or for the benefit of his dependents * * *.”
Covenant Med. Ctr. Inc v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins Co (Mich. 2017).
· cites it 51× “The Court of Appeals concluded that the circumstances of this case were addressed in MCL 500.3112, which required State Farm to seek a court order directing the proper allocation of benefits when, in addition to a first-party claim for benefits, there was also a third-party…”
Commire v. Auto. Club of Michigan Ins. Grp., 454 N.W.2d 248 (Mich. Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 2× “Defendant Auto Club claimed it discharged its liability under §3112 of the no-fault act, MCL 500.3112; MSA 24.13112, as it paid the insurance benefits in good faith to plaintiffs’ father.”
McMurry v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins., 458 F. Supp. 209 (E.D. Mich. 1978).
“§§ 500.3112, 500.3121(1). It is also the case that courts have had no problem applying the proviso to worker’s compensation cases, which no more involve liability than does no-fault.”
Hicks v. Citizens Ins. Co. of Am., 514 N.W.2d 511 (Mich. Ct. App. 1994).
“MCL 500.3112; MSA 24.13112; Commire v Automobile Club of Michigan Ins Group, 183 Mich App 299, 302 ; 454 NW2d 248 (1990).”
True Care Physical Therapy Pllc v. Auto Club Grp. Ins. Co (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 28× “True Care responded, arguing that it had a valid enforceable assignment of PIP benefits from Vukaj, and that MCL 500.3112 of the no-fault act explicitly granted it the right to pursue a direct cause of action against the insurer in the trial court.”
True Care Physical Therapy Pllc v. Auto Club Grp. Ins. Co (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 28× “True Care responded, arguing that it had a valid enforceable assignment of PIP benefits from Vukaj, and that MCL 500.3112 of the no-fault act explicitly granted it the right to pursue a direct cause of action against the insurer in the trial court.”
Husinka Grp. LLC v. Farm Bureau Gen. Ins. Co. of Mich (Mich. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 25× “More specifically, Farm Bureau contends that it has a viable defense under MCL 500.3112; that fact questions remain regarding when any benefits became “overdue” as relevant to a determination of penalty interest; and that fact-finding, on properly submitted evidence, is…”
Wyoming Chiropractic Health Clinic Pc v. Auto-Owners Ins Co., 864 N.W.2d 598 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 11× “23 This Court analyzed the plain language of MCL 500.3112 and determined that the plaintiff was entitled to prompt payment because the plaintiff brought a claim for PIP benefits “for the benefit of” the injured individual when the plaintiff submitted a claim for PIP benefits to…”
Se. Michigan Surgical Hosp. v. Auto Club Ins. Assn (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).
· cites it 20× “The issue in this case is whether a healthcare provider sending a bill to a no-fault insurer amounts to written notification of a claim under MCL 500.3112 of the no-fault act. The district court ruled that it did, and the circuit court denied defendant leave to appeal.”
Bajraszewski v. Allstate Ins., 825 F. Supp. 2d 873 (E.D. Mich. 2011).
· cites it 2× “The plaintiff, on the other hand, insists that the right to payment of PIP benefits belongs to the injured party, not those providing the care or treatment.”
Parie Wallace v. Smart (Mich. 2025).
· cites it 16× “Jose and Sandra assigned their rights to seek PIP benefits from Progressive to C-Spine, and C-Spine initiated two first-party no-fault actions under MCL 500.3112, as amended by 2019 PA 21 (granting medical providers a direct cause of action to claim benefits under the no-fault…”
C-Spine Orthopedics Pllc v. Progressive Michigan Ins. Co. (Mich. 2025).
· cites it 16× “Jose and Sandra assigned their rights to seek PIP benefits from Progressive to C-Spine, and C-Spine initiated two first-party no-fault actions under MCL 500.3112, as amended by 2019 PA 21 (granting medical providers a direct cause of action to claim benefits under the no-fault…”
20251121_C369413_36_369413.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 13× “In this case, Phase One Rehab, LLC submitted claims to Allstate Property & Casualty Company for medical services provided to Ciera Riley.”
In Re Hales Est., 451 N.W.2d 867 (Mich. Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 2× “See MCL 500.3112; MSA 24.13112, MCL 500.3114; MSA 24.”
Angerica L Downer v. USA Underwriters (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
· cites it 3× “DMC brought a separate provider’s action against USA under MCL 500.3112(1). The trial court consolidated the two actions.”
Murray (E.D. Mich. 2022).
· cites it 2×
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 500.3112(1) — 2 cases
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 500.3112(a) — 1 case
Belcher v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 293 N.W.2d 594 (Mich. 1980).
“MCL 500.3112; MSA 24.13112 provides in part: "Personal protection insurance benefits are payable to or for the benefit of an injured person or, in case of his death, to or for the benefit of his dependents.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.