Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 500.3610a (2026)

Repealed. 2016, Act 276, Imd. Eff. July 1, 2016.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

THE INSURANCE CODE OF 1956

Act 218 of 1956

500.3610a Repealed. 2016, Act 276, Imd. Eff. July 1, 2016.

Repealed. 2016, Act 276, Imd. Eff. July 1, 2016.

Compiler's Notes:

The repealed section pertained to coordination of benefits.

PopularName Notes:

Act 218

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1988–1994 · leading case: Smith v. Physicians Health Plan, Inc, 514 N.W.2d 150 (Mich. 1994).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Smith v. Physicians Health Plan, Inc, 514 N.W.2d 150 (Mich. 1994). · cites it 6× “The Court of Appeals panel in Albright held that an HMO is authorized to include coordination of benefits clauses relating to no-fault automobile insurance pursuant to MCL 500.3610a; MSA 24.13610(1), and that such a clause is not invalid under the Coordination of Benefits Act.”

Estabrook v. Lincoln Nat'l Life Ins., 432 N.W.2d 733 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “The flaw in plaintiff’s argument is that the Legislature expressly made enactment of the Coordination of Benefits Act contingent upon the enactment of SB 562, enacted as 1984 PA 65 , MCL 500.3610a; MSA 24.13610(1). See MCL 550.”

Albright v. Butterworth Hmo, 492 N.W.2d 457 (Mich. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 9× “13601 and MCL 500.3610a; MSA 24.13610(1), its certificate of coverage is a group disability insurance policy specifically authorized to provide for the coordination of benefits with automobile medical payments insurance.”

Auto-Owners Ins. v. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins., 429 N.W.2d 637 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988). “] Our Supreme Court has also addressed the question of insurer priority between overlapping medical expenses coverage when both the no-fault policy and a group health insurance policy contain coordination-of-benefits provisions.”

Transamerica Ins. Grp. v. Am. Cmty. Mut. Ins., 437 N.W.2d 28 (Mich. Ct. App. 1989). “The trial court addressed § 3610a, although noting that it was not in effect at the time the policies at hand were issued and that defendant did not establish the applicability of § 3610a to this case.”

Leja v. Health All. Plan, 509 N.W.2d 871 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “In Albright , a panel of this Court found that a group disability insurer, such as defendant, has the right, pursuant to MCL 500.3610a; MSA 24.13610(1), 1 to coordinate its benefits with automobile medical insurance covering the same loss.”

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.