What are the minimum liability limits that Michigan policyholders are entitled to receive under the MI No-Fault Act?

The Michigan No-Fault Act serves as a comprehensive framework that governs the terms and conditions of automobile insurance policies issued to drivers within the state of Michigan. This pivotal piece of legislation is designed to streamline the process of handling automobile accident claims and to ensure that individuals involved in such incidents receive the necessary support without the need for lengthy litigation. One of the key provisions of the Act is its requirement that insurers must pay benefits directly to their insureds. This includes essential payments for medical bills incurred as a result of an accident, compensation for lost income due to inability to work, and coverage for various other necessary expenses that arise from automobile-related injuries. Furthermore, the Act mandates that insurers must provide a minimum level of protection against third-party liability claims, thereby safeguarding the interests of both the insured and other parties involved in an accident.

In a significant development in 2025, the Michigan Court of Appeals issued a landmark decision in the case of  Progressive Ins Co v Espinoza-Solis, et al.  This ruling was particularly noteworthy as it established that, in the absence of an election for lower coverage limits by the policyholder, Michigan drivers would be entitled to receive no less than $250,000 in personal injury protection benefits. This was a substantial increase compared to the previously sought limits of $20,000 or $50,000 proposed by the insurer, which many argued were insufficient to cover the real costs of medical care and rehabilitation following serious accidents. The court's decision underscored the importance of adequate insurance coverage and aimed to protect consumers from being underinsured in the event of a catastrophic incident.

KUTINSKY PLLC, a law firm known for its expertise in insurance litigation, represented the claimant in this pivotal case against Progressive Insurance. The significance of the case attracted considerable attention from the insurance industry, leading to a coalition of insurance companies that collectively filed a separate amicus curiae brief in support of the insurer's arguments. This coalition's involvement highlighted the broader implications of the court's decision, as it could potentially reshape the landscape of automobile insurance policies across Michigan. The outcome of this case not only affected the immediate parties involved but also set a precedent that could influence future interpretations of the No-Fault Act and the obligations of insurers towards their policyholders.