Anselmi Mierzejewski Ruth & Sowle P.C. | A-M Law | Attorneys | Counselors

Anselmi Mierzejewski Ruth & Sowle P.C.

Insurance Defense Counsel In Jurisdictions Throughout Michigan

Shareholder Lauren N. Brezenski and Attorney Morgan E. Walters obtained a favorable ruling in the Michigan Court of Appeals in Gales v ACIA

On Behalf of | Nov 20, 2025 | Firm News

Shareholder Lauren N. Brezenski and Associate Morgan E. Walters obtain favorable ruling in the Michigan Court of Appeals | Established. Reputable. Aggressive.

Shareholder Lauren N. Brezenski and Attorney Morgan E. Walters obtained a favorable ruling in the Michigan Court of Appeals in Sheila Gales v ACIA, which addressed unlawfully taking under MCL 500.3113(a). In trial court proceedings, which took place in Wayne County Circuit Court, Plaintiff argued that she was entitled to no-fault benefits due to her reasonable belief that she was granted permission for the use of a vehicle, in spite of never having been expressly granted permission.

Attorney Walters skillfully deposed both Plaintiff and the vehicle owner and obtained testimony from both parties which affirmed Plaintiff had not been granted permissive use of the vehicle and that her use of the vehicle did constitute unlawful taking. Attorney Walters was granted summary disposition disqualifying Plaintiff from receiving no-fault benefits in the trial court. Plaintiff filed a Motion for Reconsideration pertaining to the standard for unlawful taking pursuant to MCL 500.3113(a), which was denied in the trial court.

Plaintiff filed an Appeal, and argued to the Michigan Court of Appeals that Plaintiff’s belief she had permission to use the vehicle precluded an unlawful taking argument. Shareholder Brezenski, with the assistance of Attorney Walters, established in the Court of Appeals that the 2015 reform of the aforementioned statute amended the scienter standard of the statute in expanding the scope of individuals who may be barred from receipt of no-fault benefits to include any person who “knew or should have known that the motor vehicle or motorcycle was taken unlawfully”. Moreover, Shareholder Brezenski used the deposition testimony relied upon in the trial court to establish once more that Plaintiff had never been given express permission to use the vehicle and thus, should have known she was not granted permissive use of the vehicle.

The Michigan Court of Appeals ultimately affirmed the lower court ruling in favor of the carrier; as such, Plaintiff was deemed ineligible for no-fault benefits and her claims were dismissed.