Legal Opinion

Tatum v. Government Employees Insurance

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 16, 1988No. 80378, (Calendar No. 5)PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Per curiam

introduction

In this case the plaintiff was involved in an automobile accident and was severely injured. At the time of the injury, plaintiff was a member of the armed forces on active duty and qualified for federal military medical benefits pursuant to 10 USC 1071 et seq. He was also the owner of an automobile insured by the defendant, Government Employees Insurance Company (geico), and therefore qualified for no-fault insurance benefits. We are asked to decide whether the defendant is permitted to set off under MCL 500.3109(1); MSA 24.13109(1) of the no-fault act the medical benefits…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. O'Donnell v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1979
  2. LeBlanc v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Jarosz v. Detroit Automobile Inter-Insurance ExchangeMichigan Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Nyquist v. Aetna InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1978
  5. Crowley v. Detroit Automobile Inter-Insurance ExchangeMichigan Supreme Court · 1987

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Michigan Educational Employees Mutual Insurance v. MorrisMichigan Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Department of Social Services v. American Commercial Liability InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Profit v. Citizens Insurance Co. of AmericaMichigan Supreme Court · 1993
  4. Jarrad v. Integon National InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 2005
  5. DeMeglio v. Auto Club Ins. Ass'nMichigan Supreme Court · 1995

10 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