 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Wylin v. Auto Owners Insurance Co.10/18/2005
UNPUBLISHED
Before: Owens, P.J., and Fitzgerald and Schuette, JJ.
Plaintiffs appeal as of right the order granting summary disposition pursuant to MCR 2.116(C)(10) in favor of defendant, Auto Owners Insurance Company, on the ground that defendant had no duty to defend plaintiffs and therefore plaintiffs were not entitled to reimbursement of defense costs associated with the underlying claim. We affirm.
In the underlying case, Randie Grier pleaded the following allegations: 1) fraud and misrepresentation, 2) intentional infliction of emotional distress, 3) tortious interference with a contract, 4) abuse of process, 5) trespass to real property, and 6) slander of title. Grier alleged in part that Ideal Mortgage, through its loan officer Jason Davis, attempted to defraud him of his interest in real property located at 19713 Snowden in Detroit, Michigan. Grier alleged that Davis processed a mortgage for Jimmie Dumas, who, along with Grier, purchased the property under a land contract. Grier claimed that Davis had knowledge of Grier's interest in the property at the time he processed mortgage documents showing that Dumas was the sole owner of the property. Grier also alleged that Randall and Michele Wylin, as officers and shareholders of Ideal Mortgage, acted in concert with Davis in furtherance of the fraud.
After a trial in the underlying action, the trial court found that Grier had no warranty deed or quit claim deed to the property. But there was a land contract listing both Grier and Dumas as vendees. There was evidence that only Dumas tendered payment on the land contract and that Grier failed to offer proof of consideration paid relating to that contract or of payments owing under the contract. The trial court found that any interest that Grier may have possessed in the property was extinguished by his failure to cure his default for nonpayment. The trial court further found that Davis was unaware of Grier's alleged interest in the property when he assisted Dumas, the holder of a warranty deed at that time, in obtaining a mortgage through Ideal Mortgage. The trial court concluded that Grier had no legal interest in the property at the time that he alleged his cause of action accrued and dismissed all of his claims.
Before trial in the underlying action, plaintiffs sent a notice of claim to Auto Owners in which they notified Auto Owners of the impending trial and requested assistance in defending against the allegations. Auto Owners responded by sending a reservation of rights letter to plaintiffs, and subsequently sending written notice that it was rejecting plaintiffs' claim for coverage. Auto Owners denied coverage on its determination that the underlying claim did not involve "an occurrence or a claim for bodily injury, property damage, personal injury or advertising injury." After unsuccessfully requesting reimbursement from Auto Owners for costs incurred in defending against the underlying action, plaintiffs filed the present claim.
Plaintiffs' first argue that the trial court erred in granting summary disposition in favor of Auto Owners because Auto Owners had a duty to defend and reimburse plaintiffs with regard to the underlying action that alleged property damage covered under the insurance policy. We disagree.
We review a trial court's ruling on a motion for summary disposition de novo. Maskery v University of Michigan Bd of Regents, 468 Mich 609, 613; 664 NW2d 165 (2003). Interpretation and construction of insurance contracts are also questions of law that this Court reviews de novo. Shefman v Auto-Owners Ins Co, 262 Mich App 631, 636; 687 NW2d 300 (2004).
"It is well established that an insurer
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.
|
|