CHRISTOPHER HARWOOD V STATE FARM MUT AUTO INS CO
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
CHRISTOPHER HARWOOD,
UNPUBLISHED
January 10, 2006
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v
No. 263500
Wayne Circuit Court
LC No. 04-433378-CK
STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE
INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendant-Appellee,
and
CLYDE ANTHONY OWENS,
Defendant.
Before: White, P.J., and Jansen and Wilder, JJ.
WHITE, P.J. (dissenting).
I respectfully dissent. Plaintiff commenced this action on October 27, 2004, only twentysix days after his attorney wrote defendant demanding arbitration of the claim. Nevertheless,
plaintiff submitted the affidavit of his wife attesting that she informed defendant’s agent of the
loss and claim orally in the summer of 2004, more than thirty days prior to October 27, 2004,
and produced a declarations sheet that she claimed was faxed to her by the agent. Admittedly,
the contract requires written notice. However, defendant has not demonstrated prejudice from
the twenty-six day (as opposed to thirty day) written notice, and the timely oral (as opposed to
written) notice. There has been substantial compliance with the terms of the contract, which
distinguishes this case from Rory v Continental Ins Co, 473 Mich 457; 703 NW2d 23 (2005). At
a minimum, the action should have been dismissed without prejudice, since compliance with the
notice provisions was still possible.
/s/ Helene N. White
-1-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
