Michael F. Schmidt Obtains Summary Disposition Per Order Of Michigan Court Of Appeals On Application For Leave To Appeal

James Jackson v Mark David Radzwion, PVS Transportation, Inc., et al, Wayne County Circuit Court, claim by plaintiff for alleged injuries resulting from alleged car/truck accident. After obtaining discovery responses and deposing the plaintiff we filed a motion for summary disposition that the plaintiff’s third party tort action from the alleged accident was barred because the plaintiff was a Michigan resident who had failed to obtain and maintain a no fault insurance policy on his vehicle at the time of the accident.

The trial court heard our argument and granted our motion for summary disposition. Thereafter plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration and several months later the court granted plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration. We responded with an emergency motion to file response briefs and the court held additional oral argument and at the conclusion of the argument ordered that the court’s order granting the plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration was vacated and that the parties were to file additional briefs on the issue.

The issue was whether the plaintiff’s admissions in interrogatory answers and at deposition were sufficient to establish that he was a Michigan resident. Several months later the trial court issued another order, once again, granting plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration, holding that there was a genuine issue of material fact regarding the plaintiff’s domicile. We then filed an Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeals arguing that there was no issue of fact and that the plaintiff’s interrogatory answers and deposition testimony were binding and that the plaintiff could not raise an issue of fact by a subsequently filed affidavit. We then filed a motion for immediate consideration, and in response the Court of Appeals issued an order that the trial court’s order granting plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration was reversed and held that the plaintiff’s deposition testimony and answers to interrogatories established that he was a long time Michigan resident who had insured his vehicle in Georgia and that the plaintiff’s later submitted affidavit that contradicted his deposition testimony should not have been considered.

The case was remanded to the circuit court. On remand the trial court granted summary disposition in favor of the defendants Radzwion and PVS Transportation, Inc.