Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Success Stories of Personal Injury Lawyers Directory US Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Canada Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Resource Directory
Search Lawyers by Zip Code
facebook.com/injury.usa

  to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.

Ford v. Architectural Door & Millwork

12/28/2004

ckwell could have made an offer of judgment. In any event, the trial court was correct that the claim was not submitted to evaluation and, therefore, cannot be the basis for an award of mediation sanctions.


Blackwell next argues that it was entitled to sanctions against ADAM. The case evaluators awarded $40,000 against Blackwell and in favor of ADAM on ADAM's indemnity claim. Both ADAM and Blackwell had filed conditional acceptances of the award, the condition being acceptance by all parties. The trial court denied sanctions against ADAM because there was, in fact, no verdict on ADAM's claim against Blackwell to provide the basis for an award. We agree with the trial court.


The verdict form in the case at bar directed the jury to consider ADAM's claim against Blackwell only if it had awarded damages to plaintiff against ADAM. Because the jury did not award damages to plaintiff, it never answered the questions regarding ADAM's claim against Blackwell. MCR 2.403(O)(1) provides for sanctions only if the case evaluation award is rejected and "the action proceeds to verdict." Under MCR 2.403(O)(2), a "verdict" is defined as a jury verdict, a judgment by the trial court following a non-jury trial, or a judgment entered as the result of a ruling on a motion. None of those situations fit the case at bar. The claim was rendered moot by the jury's verdict of no cause of action on the main claim and, therefore, the indemnity claim never went to verdict. Because the action did not proceed to verdict, neither party is entitled to sanctions.


We remand to the trial court for further proceedings on Blackwell's claim against Northland to provide a defense under the terms of the insurance policy. In all other respects, we affirm. Defendant ADAM may tax costs in Nos. 248021 and 248024. Plaintiff may tax costs in No. 248024. Blackwell may tax costs in No. 250414. We do not retain jurisdiction.


Christopher M. Murray, David H. Sawyer, Michael R. Smolenski.




Page 1 2 3 4 5 

Michigan Personal Injury Attorneys    Personal Injury Lawyers


  to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.

Personal Injury Lawyers Brain Injuries Spinal Cord Injuries
Quadriplegia and Paraplegia Back Injuries Ruptured & Herniated Disks
Bulging Disk Neck Injuries Dog Bites
Toxic Mold Product Liability Fire Accidents
Trucking Accidents Boating Accidents Car Accidents
Plane Crashes Medical Malpractice Motorcycle Accidents
Wrongful Death Personal Injury Lawsuits Testimonial
FDP  |   RSS Feeds  |  Articles  |  Jobs  |  Leads  |  Partner Websites
DUI Defense  |  SiteMap  | PI Blog  | Trading Partners | Attorney Registration  | PI Case Laws  | FAQ | Personal Injury Forum
 | Personal Injury Lawyers Directory  | Success Stories  | Press Releases
Copyright © 2005. “National Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (NAPIL)”. All rights reserved.
By using the system, you agree to TERMS OF SERVICE