Legal Opinion
Whaley v. Auto Club Ins. Ass'n
District Court, E.D. Michigan
Decided July 5, 1995No. 2:95-cv-70713PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER AND OPINION OF THE COURT
GILMORE, District Judge.
This case presents a statute interpretation dispute between defendant, Auto Club Insurance, and one of its salaried Sales Account Representatives (SARs), plaintiff Donna Whaley. The statute at issue is Chapter 33 of the Michigan Insurance Code, Mich.Comp. Law. § 500.3301 et seq. — which in part requires all automobile insurance companies licensed to do business in the state to be a participating member in the Michigan Automobile Insurance Placement Facility (“MAIPF”). A brief description of the MAIPF is necessary for a better understanding…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Sedima, S. P. R. L. v. Imrex Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Reves v. Ernst & YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Haroco, Inc. v. American National Bank and Trust Company of Chicago, Walter E. Heller International Corporation, & Ronald J. GrayheckCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
- American Nat. Bank & Trust Co. of Chicago v. Haroco, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Paul Bender, George and Diane Decarlo v. Southland CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1984
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- BCCI Holdings (Luxembourg) Societe Anon. v. KhalilDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1999
- Advocacy Organization For Patients And Providers v. Auto Club Insurance AssociationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1999
- Advocacy Organization for Patients & Providers v. Auto Club InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1999
- Oppong v. Owensboro Health Medical Group IncDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 2024