Bonkowski v. Allstate Insurance

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• acknowledging that the Court of Appeals had “previously embraced the notion that ‘comparison to rates charged by institutions provides a valid method for determining whether the amount of an expense was reasonable and for placing a value on comparable services performed [by family members]’”
• acknowledging that the Court of Appeals had “previously embraced the notion that ‘comparison to rates charged by institutions provides a valid method for determining whether the amount of an expense was reasonable and for placing a value on comparable services performed [by family members]’ ”
• declining to address the plaintiff’s request for damages because the request came from a brief on appeal rather than a motion pursuant to MCR 7.216(C)(1)
• allowing a family-caregiver to recover compensation comparable to that of a qualified attendant caregiver where the family-caregiver “provide[d] care consistent with that of a licensed health care professional.”
• “A party may not waive objection to an issue and then argue on appeal that the resultant action was error.”
• “This Court’s review is limited to the record of the trial court.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).