Attorneys and Counselors
As a service to its clients, Kallas & Henk publishes Michigan Coverage Decisions. This publication summarizes and analyzes every appellate decision in Michigan addressing or impacting property and casualty insurance.
The ten most recent issues are listed on this page. To search the full database of our Michigan Coverage Decisions Issues by Topic, Keyword, or Issue Number use the search form to the left.
Unpublished. Decided August 13, 2013 Michigan Court of Appeals Docket No. 307232.
The plaintiff was the general contractor on a construction project and had sub-contracted part of its roof installation work to the defendant. The section of the roof on which the defendant worked was defective, and damages occurredPublished. Decided July 9, 2013 Michigan Court of Appeals Docket No. 307711.
The underlying plaintiff worked as a laborer for the defendant performing lawn maintenance. In the course of his duties, the underlying plaintiff was injured while unclogging a jammed leaf vacuum machine which fellUnpublished. Decided March 21, 2013 Michigan Court of Appeals Docket No. 308256.
The plaintiff hired the defendant to repair the roof on one of its buildings. Part of the parties’ contract required the defendant to secure the building so that water could not infiltrate while the repairs were beingUnpublished. Decided February 28, 2013 Michigan Court of Appeals Docket No. 306408.
The defendant sold cosmetic contact lenses to the underlying plaintiff, who had a severe reaction which resulted in serious injuries, including permanent impairment of her vision. She filed a lawsuit against the defendant, and the plaintiff defendedUnpublished. Decided January 17, 2013 Michigan Court of Appeals Docket No. 305473.
The plaintiff contacted the defendant directly to purchase a policy to cover rental premises he owned. After completing the application process and paying the premium, the defendant erroneously issued a homeowners policy to the plaintiffUnpublished. Decided November 18, 2012 Michigan Court of Appeals Docket No. 300825.
The underlying plaintiff sued the defendant for injuries caused in an accident involving an all-terrain vehicle, which the defendant was driving on vacant land adjacent to the insured premises. The adjoining property was not owned by the defendantUnpublished. Decided October 25, 2012 Michigan Court of Appeals Docket No. 305305.
The plaintiffs filed suit related to damages arising from the construction of their home, and named the defendant and several other contractors. The case proceeded to trial and the plaintiffs recovered judgments against the defendants for theirPublished. Decided October 16, 2012 Michigan Court of Appeals Docket No. 307128.
The defendant’s controller embezzled funds by writing unauthorized payroll checks to herself in addition to her salary. When it was discovered, the defendant filed a claim under its employee dishonesty coverage. That policy applies to lossesPublished. Decided September 11, 2012 US 6th Circuit Court of Appeals Docket No. 10-2480.
The plaintiff obtained a fidelity policy from the insurer, which covers losses incurred directly due to employee theft. A short time after the policy was issued, one of the plaintiff’s employeesUnpublished. Decided July 5, 2012 Michigan Court of Appeals Docket No. 301759.
After back surgery, the plaintiff suffered complications and attempted to contact the surgeon for direction on how to address those complications. The surgeon did not respond to the plaintiff’s attempts and, the plaintiff became disabled. He filed the