Legal Opinion

State Farm Automobile Insurance v. Tiedman

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided August 2, 1989No. Docket 107944PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

Defendants appeal as of right from the opinion and judgment of the Clare Circuit Court which granted summary disposition to plaintiff in its declaratory judgment action. MCR 2.116(C)(10). The court ruled that an antistacking provision in a policy of no-fault automobile insurance issued by plaintiff was valid and, thus, defen dants were precluded from receiving no-fault damages under a second insurance policy issued by plaintiff. Plaintiff cross-appeals from that same opinion and judgment, raising a claim that was asserted below but not fully decided by the court. We affirm.

This lawsuit arises…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Powers v. Detroit Automobile Inter-Insurance ExchangeMichigan Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Wilson v. Cotton States Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1987
  3. DeMaria v. AUTO CLUB INS. ASSOCIATIONMichigan Court of Appeals · 1987
  4. Auto Club Ins. Ass'n v. LanyonMichigan Court of Appeals · 1985
  5. Goodman v. Allstate InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1987

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Rasmussen v. STATE FARM MUT. AUTO. INS.Nebraska Supreme Court · 2009

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

Powered by the Exa API