Plaintiff
Ali Bazzi was injured in an automobile accident while driving a vehicle owned
by his mother, and insured under a no-fault automobile insurance policy issued
by defendant Sentinel Insurance Company. Plaintiff filed suit against Sentinel
seeking personal injury protection (PIP) benefits. Sentinel rescinded the
policy, claiming that it was procured by fraud. Sentinel then filed a motion
for summary disposition on the PIP claims asserted by plaintiff. The trial
court denied the motion on the basis of the innocent third-party rule, which
provides that an insurer may not rescind a no-fault insurance policy because of
a material misrepresentation made in the application for insurance where there
is a claim involving an innocent third party. Sentinel sought interlocutory
appellate review, which the Court of Appeals denied. The Supreme Court remanded
the case to the Court of Appeals for consideration as on leave granted. On
remand, the Court of Appeals, in a published opinion, held that the innocent
third-party rule did not survive the Supreme Court’s decision in Titan Ins Co v Hyten, 491 Mich 547
(2012). Therefore, the Court of Appeals reversed the ruling of the trial court
and remanded for further proceedings. Plaintiff and two intervenors (healthcare
providers that provided services to plaintiff) sought leave to appeal in the
Supreme Court, which has granted leave to appeal to address whether the
innocent third-party rule survived Titan.