 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Wylin v. Auto Owners Insurance Co.10/18/2005
ctive of special harm (defamation per se) or the existence of special harm caused by the publication (defamation per quod)." American Transmission, Inc, supra at 702. In contrast, the underlying complaint alleges slander of title, which includes the following elements: (1) the publication of a false matter disparaging the plaintiff's title to real property, (2) with malice, and (3) resulting in special damages. GKC Mich Theatres v Grand Mall, 222 Mich App 294, 301; 564 NW2d 117 (1997). The proofs for a claim of slander of title relate to statements regarding the plaintiffs' title to real property, while the proofs for a slander or defamation claim relate to statements disparaging the plaintiff himself. Because these are two distinct torts with markedly different proofs, and because the policy limits coverage to disparaging statements about a person or organization or a person's or organization's goods, products or services, it is clear that no insurance coverage exists for the slander of title allegation in the underlying complaint. Accordingly, we conclude that the trial court did not err in ruling that there was no coverage under the personal protection provision of the insurance policy and that Auto Owners was entitled to summary disposition.
Because the trial court did not err in granting summary disposition in favor of Auto Owners, we decline to address plaintiffs' claim that they are entitled to twelve percent interest on the reimbursement amount.
Affirmed.
Donald S. Owens, E. Thomas Fitzgerald, Bill Schuette.
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.
|
|