Atkins v. Suburban Mobility Authority for Regional Transportation
492 Mich. 707
| Mich. | 2012Background
- Plaintiff Atkins, a SMART bus passenger, was involved in a collision on September 15, 2006.
- SMART investigated immediately; Atkins did not stay for the scene investigation but later notified SMART of injuries via ASU Group about 10 days after the accident.
- ASU sent Atkins a no‑fault benefits application; SMART began paying first‑party no‑fault benefits and stayed informed of her medical status.
- By May 4, 2007 Atkins, through counsel, notified SMART of an intent to pursue tort claims arising from the accident.
- On August 7, 2007 Atkins filed suit asserting third‑party tort claims and a no‑fault benefits claim; SMART moved for summary disposition arguing failure to give 60‑day written notice of a tort claim under MCL 124.419.
- MCL 124.419 requires written notice of any injury‑based claim against a common carrier within 60 days; the issue is whether a no‑fault application satisfies this notice for a third‑party tort claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does a no‑fault benefits application satisfy MCL 124.419's written notice for a third‑party tort claim? | Atkins contends SMART had notice through the no‑fault claim and SMART's knowledge of facts. | SMART argues no‑fault notice is not written notice of a third‑party tort claim and the 60‑day deadline governs ordinary tort claims. | No; no‑fault notice does not satisfy the 60‑day written notice requirement for ordinary tort claims. |
Key Cases Cited
- Trent v Suburban Mobility Auth for Regional Transp, 252 Mich App 247 (2002) (60‑day notice not required for no‑fault claims; ordinary tort claims governed separately)
- Rowland v Washtenaw Co Rd Comm, 477 Mich 197 (2007) (rejected prejudice requirement; clarified notice interpretation under similar statutes)
- McCahan v Brennan, 492 Mich 730 (2012) (treatises on statutory notice; legislative language governs)
- Hobbs v Dep’t of State Hwys, 398 Mich 90 (1976) (prejudice-based approach to notice provisions in government tort acts)
- Brown v Manistee Co Rd Comm, 452 Mich 354 (1996) (statutory notice within 60 days invalidates if no rational basis)
- Grubaugh v City of St Johns, 384 Mich 165 (1970) (early strict notice doctrine under governmental liability acts)
- Reich v State Hwy Dep’t, 386 Mich 617 (1972) (constitutional concerns with 60‑day notice provisions)
- Carver v McKernan, 390 Mich 96 (1973) (prejudice standard for enforceability of notice provisions; evolution over time)