Legal Opinion

Auto-Owners Insurance v. Commissioner of Insurance

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided April 8, 1985No. Docket No. 73340PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDanhof, C.J.

Respondent, the Commissioner of Insurance, appeals as of right from an order of the lower court holding that respondent erred in finding that the remedy of rescission was not available to petitioner and that respondent was unauthorized to reinstate the rescinded policies of insurance. Respondent held an administrative hearing and ordered petitioner to reinstate two automobile insurance policies. Petitioner appealed this decision to the circuit court. We agree with the lower court’s decision and affirm. The policies involved two different families, the Darnells and the Fantis.

Mrs. Darnell…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. KurylowiczMichigan Court of Appeals · 1976
  2. Keys v. PaceMichigan Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Wall v. ZyndaMichigan Supreme Court · 1938
  4. United Security Insurance v. Commissioner of InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1984
  5. Detroit Automobile Inter-Insurance Exchange v. AyvazianMichigan Court of Appeals · 1975

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Smith v. Globe Life InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Lash v. Allstate InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1995
  3. Darnell v. Auto-Owners InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1985
  4. United of Omaha Life Insurance Company v. Rex Roto CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1997
  5. Coburn v. FoxMichigan Supreme Court · 1986

5 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