Wilson v. Newman

I dissent. Today, the majority holds that the Court of Appeals improperly rejected existing Michigan precedent when it wrote Shield Benefit Administrators, Inc v Univ of Michigan Bd of Regents.1 Shield Benefit adopted the Restatement on Restitution, § 14(1),2 ante at 436-437. The “precedent” *444referred to by the majority is Couper v Metropolitan Life Ins Co3 and Madden v Employers Ins of Wausau.4

However, these cases involved a different circumstance than exists either in Shield Benefit or in the case before us on appeal. Specifically, Couper and Madden involved a mistaken payment in a two-party…