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

  1. Welton v. Carriers InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Allstate Insurance v. Frankenmuth Mutual InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1981
  3. Kransz v. MeredithMichigan Court of Appeals · 1983
  4. Derham v. DerhamMichigan Supreme Court · 1900