Legal Opinion

In re Carroll

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided April 2, 2013No. Docket No. 292649PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ON REMAND

M. J. KELLY, J.

This case returns to us on remand from our Supreme Court. In re Carroll, 493 Mich 899 (2012). We previously had determined that, under MCL 500.3107(l)(a), respondent, Auto Club Insurance Association, had to pay the entire fee of petitioner, Alan A. *156May, for services rendered as the conservator of Edward Carroll’s estate. See In re Carroll, 292 Mich App 395, 407; 807 NW2d 70 (2011). We are called upon to again address this issue, but to do so in light of our Supreme Court’s recent decisions in Johnson v Recca, 492 Mich 169; 821 NW2d 520 (2012), and Douglas v Allstate…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Johnson v. ReccaMichigan Supreme Court · 2012
  2. Griffith v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 2005
  3. Douglas v. Allstate Insurance CompanyMichigan Supreme Court · 2012
  4. Van Marter v. American Fidelity Fire InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1982
  5. Visconti v. Detroit Automobile Inter-Insurance ExchangeMichigan Court of Appeals · 1979

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Agnone v. Home-Owners Insurance CompanyMichigan Court of Appeals · 2015
  2. Smith v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2014
  3. Jami Lessard v. James WhittemoreMichigan Court of Appeals · 2019
  4. in Re Guardianship of Amanda KhemmoroMichigan Court of Appeals · 2019

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API