- Posted May 27, 2013
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
High court says insurer doesn't have to buy van
LANSING (AP) -- An insurance company that refused to pay for a van for a disabled man has won an appeal at the Michigan Supreme Court.
Auto-Owners Insurance says it agreed to pay for modifications to the van so Ken Admire could travel with his wheelchair. But it told the Ingham County man in 2007 that it would no longer pay for an entire vehicle because of a change in Michigan law.
That left Admire with an out-of-pocket cost of $18,000. He was severely injured years ago when his motorcycle was struck by a car.
In a 4-1 decision, the Supreme Court says the cost of a van is an expense that Admire would have faced regardless of his injuries. Republican justices say the need for transportation didn't change because of his accident.
Published: Mon, May 27, 2013
headlines Oakland County
- Associations gather for Spring Fling
- Nessel announces airline passenger protection partnership with U.S. Department of Transportation
- American Bar Association to release Civic Literacy Survey 2024 findings on April 23
- Former State House speaker charged with 13 felonies, conducting a criminal enterprise
- SUPREME COURT NOTEBOOK
headlines National
- Incarceration series includes female inmates but doesn’t tell full story
- ACLU and BigLaw firm use ‘Orange is the New Black’ in hashtag effort to promote NY jail reform
- Former DOJ official who alleged election fraud violated at least one ethics rule, ethics committee says
- Winston & Strawn will provide reduced-cost legal services for routine tasks under Winston Legal Solutions umbrella
- Should Justice Sotomayor retire? Chemerinsky, White House haven’t joined calls for her to step down
- Which BigLaw firms are increasing lateral associate hiring the most? One made legal headlines last year