Sign In

160592 - Esurance Prop & Casualty Ins Co v MI Assigned Claims Plan

Esurance Property & Casualty Insurance Company,

 

Drew Broaddus

 

Plaintiff-Appellant,

 

v

(Appeal from Ct of Appeals)

 

 

(Wayne – Allen, D.)

 

Michigan Assigned Claims Plan and Michigan Automobile Insurance Placement Facility,

 

Lori McAllister

 

Defendants-Appellees.

 

Summary

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.​