Legal Opinion

Gregory v. Transamerica Insurance

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided December 3, 1984No. Docket 72708PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtM. Warshawsky, J.

The issue in this case is whether, under § 3109(1) of the no-fault insurance act, 1 money received by plaintiff pursuant to a workers’ compensation redemption agreement which specifically allocated the money to past, present and future medical expenses may be deducted by defendant from no-fault wage-loss benefits otherwise due. We hold that under the circumstances of this case, defendant is not entitled to a setoff under § 3109(1).

On October 27, 1980, plaintiff was allegedly injured in an automobile collision during the course of his employment. The vehicle involved in the accident was leased…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Perez v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Jarosz v. Detroit Automobile Inter-Insurance ExchangeMichigan Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Moore v. Travelers InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1979
  4. Perez v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1981
  5. Thacker v. Detroit Automobile Inter-Insurance ExchangeMichigan Court of Appeals · 1982

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Gregory v. Transamerica InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Divito v. Transamerica Corp. of AmericaMichigan Court of Appeals · 1985
  3. McFadden v. Allstate InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1987
  4. Cannell v. Riverside InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1985
  5. Cannell v. Riverside InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1985

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

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

Powered by the Exa API