Legal Opinion
Marquis v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided March 15, 1994No. 94617, (Calendar No. 9)PublishedCited by 147 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGriffin, J.
We must determine the meaning of the "work loss” provision 1 of the no-fault insurance act 2 in a situation in which plaintiff, after recovering from automobile accident injuries, found that she could not return to her job because it had been filled with a permanent replacement. Six months later she located another job that paid substantially less, but, finding it unsuitable, she quit after two months.
The Court of Appeals ruled that the no-fault act entitles plaintiff to work-loss benefits based on the wage differential between the two jobs, not only for the two months she worked on the…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Advisory Opinion Re Constitutionality of 1972 PA 294Michigan Supreme Court · 1973
- Fairfax's v. Hunter's LesseeSupreme Court of the United States · 1813
- Tebo v. HavlikMichigan Supreme Court · 1984
- Norfolk Redevelopment & Housing Authority v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co. of VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Myers v. Genesee County AuditorMichigan Supreme Court · 1965
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by147 opinions
- In Re Complaint of Rovas Against SbcMichigan Supreme Court · 2008
- Lewis v. LeGrowMichigan Court of Appeals · 2003
- Popma v. Auto Club Ins. Ass'n.Michigan Supreme Court · 1994
- Ali Bazzi v. Sentinel Insurance CompanyMichigan Supreme Court · 2018
- Barrett v. Kirtland Community CollegeMichigan Court of Appeals · 2001
142 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.