Skip to Content
News & Insights

Michael F. Schmidt And Nate Peplinski Obtain Summary Disposition In Claim For Alleged Damages To Motor Vehicles

Marks One Car Rental, Inc. v David Todd and GEICO Indemnity Company, Macomb County Circuit Court.¬†Claim by the plaintiff for alleged damage to two vehicles allegedly stolen from a GEICO insured. Following discovery we filed a motion for summary disposition on behalf of GEICO on the basis that the plaintiff could not sue GEICO because the plaintiff was not a party to the policy of insurance and not a third party beneficiary. In addition, we argued that the claim was also barred because of spoliation of the evidence by the plaintiff’s refusal to allow GEICO to examine or inspect the damaged property. The trial court granted summary disposition in favor of GEICO in a 16 page written opinion holding that the plaintiff could not sue GEICO because the plaintiff was not a party to the policy of insurance, was not a third party beneficiary of the policy, and also had failed to comply with the policy conditions regarding a loss. The court further held that the plaintiff’s claim was dismissed because of spoliation of evidence by the plaintiff’s refusal to allow GEICO to inspect the vehicles.