Marquis v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “a primary goal of the no-fault act is to ‘provid[e] an equitable and prompt method of redressing injuries in a way which made the mandatory insurance coverage affordable to all motorists’ ”
• stating that “well-settled common-law principles are not to be abolished by implication in the guise of statutory construction”
• noting that the limit stated in MCL 500.3107(l)(b) applies to the total of the work-loss benefit and income earned, and concluding that this statutory language implicitly recognizes that injured workers should mitigate their work losses by returning to work
• approving of the Luberda Court’s interpretation of the statute as presently drafted

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).