- Posted May 27, 2013
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
High court says insurer doesn't have to buy van
LANSING (AP) -- An insurance company that refused to pay for a van for a disabled man has won an appeal at the Michigan Supreme Court.
Auto-Owners Insurance says it agreed to pay for modifications to the van so Ken Admire could travel with his wheelchair. But it told the Ingham County man in 2007 that it would no longer pay for an entire vehicle because of a change in Michigan law.
That left Admire with an out-of-pocket cost of $18,000. He was severely injured years ago when his motorcycle was struck by a car.
In a 4-1 decision, the Supreme Court says the cost of a van is an expense that Admire would have faced regardless of his injuries. Republican justices say the need for transportation didn't change because of his accident.
Published: Mon, May 27, 2013
headlines Oakland County
- Reading reenactment
- Supreme Court overturns precedent on how to determine a child's domicile when parents are divorced
- Nessel reissues government imposter scams consumer alert following reports
- Formal Opinion 524: Government lawyers’ obligations when knowing of a public official’s intended or ongoing violation of law
- Whitmer signs bipartisan bills to address the opioid crisis, support public health
headlines National
- How to use AI but steer clear of hallucinated cases
- Lawyers for low-income clients strike in NYC
- Top prosecutor for International Criminal Court accused of sexual misconduct
- Big Tech companies facing new wave of lawsuits over copyright and AI
- Lawyer says he was ‘manic’ when he bought Cape Cod mansion in danger of falling into ocean
- Judge regrets ‘entitled little snot’ comment but still fit for the bench, lawyer says




