Legal Opinion

Lockridge v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided June 26, 2000No. Docket 211687PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtSaad, J.

I. NATURE OF THE CASE

While plaintiff was off work because of a work-related disabling injury, and while he was accepting wage-loss benefits from General Motors Corporation (gm) under worker’s compensation laws, plaintiff was injured in an automobile accident on April 3, 1995. For more than a year after his automobile accident, plaintiff continued to accept worker’s compensation wage-loss benefits from GM and, by doing so, represented to GM that he was entitled to those benefits because his work-related injury continued to prevent *509him from working. Plaintiff also sought work-loss benefits from…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Spiek v. Department of TransportationMichigan Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Quinto v. Cross and Peters Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Bertrand v. Alan Ford, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Popma v. Auto Club Ins. Ass'n.Michigan Supreme Court · 1994
  5. MacDonald v. State Farm Mutual InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1984

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Lockridge v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 2000

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API