Esurance
Property & Casualty Insurance Company paid approximately $571,000 in
first-party no-fault benefits to a person seriously injured in an automobile
accident. Esurance then obtained a
ruling that the insurance policy had been procured through fraud and was void ab initio (from the beginning). Because there was no other potentially
applicable insurance, Esurance sued the Michigan Assigned Claims Plan and the Michigan
Automobile Insurance Placement Facility (defendants), seeking reimbursement
under a theory of equitable subrogation.
The trial court granted summary disposition to the defendants under MCR
2.116(C)(8), and the Court of Appeals affirmed in a published opinion. The
Supreme Court has ordered oral argument on the application to address
whether a finding that an insurance policy was void ab initio
because it was procured by fraud bars a subsequent claim for equitable
subrogation for benefits that were paid pursuant to that policy before it was
found to be void.