Legal Opinion · Dissent
Hanesh v. Lake States Mutual Insurance
Michigan Court of Appeals
Decided November 19, 1985No. Docket No. 77157Published
1Dissent
D. E. Holbrook, Jr., P.J.
(dissenting). I dissent for the reasons expressed in Kransz v Meredith, 123 Mich 454; 332 NW2d 571 (1983), and Allstate Ins Co v Frankenmuth Mutual Ins Co, 111 Mich App 617; 314 NW2d 711 (1981). As the Supreme Court in Welton v Carriers Ins Co, 421 Mich 571; 365 NW2d 170 (1984), carefully avoided determining whether Richards tolling is available under the statute, I see no reason to retreat from my position.
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Welton v. Carriers InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1985
- Allstate Insurance v. Frankenmuth Mutual InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1981
- Kransz v. MeredithMichigan Court of Appeals · 1983
- Derham v. DerhamMichigan Supreme Court · 1900