Legislation watch
Mackinac Center for Public Policy
Capitol Building

2014 House Bill 5558: Clarify preemption of insurance lawsuits under Consumer Protection Act

Public Act 251 of 2014

  1. Introduced by Rep. Tom Leonard (R) on May 8, 2014, to clarify that a prohibition of "unfair practices" lawsuits against insurance companies under the state Consumer Protection Act (rather than the state's Insurance Code) applies even if the cause of action occurred before a 2001 law was enacted specifying that industries like insurance which are already subject to a comprehensive state regulatory regime are not covered by the Consumer Protection Act.
    • Referred to the House Judiciary Committee on May 8, 2014.
      • Reported in the House on May 22, 2014, without amendment and with the recommendation that the bill pass.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Jeff Irwin (D) on June 5, 2014, to tie-bar the bill to House Bill 5522, meaning this bill cannot become law unless that one does also. HB 5522 would authorize penalties of $10,000 plus three times the amount of any benefits withheld and attorney costs for a insurer that fails to pay a claims in a timely manner due to a variety of specified unfair practices. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on June 5, 2014.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Jeff Irwin (D) on June 5, 2014, to tie-bar the bill to House Bill 5521, meaning this bill cannot become law unless that one does also. HB 5521 would essentially authorize what this bill prohibits. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on June 5, 2014.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Jeff Irwin (D) on June 5, 2014, to tie-bar the bill to House Bill 5520, meaning this bill cannot become law unless that one does also. HB 5520 would essentially authorize what this bill prohibits. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on June 5, 2014.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Sam Singh (D) on June 5, 2014, to tie-bar the bill to House Bill 5378, meaning this bill cannot become law unless that one does also. HB 5378 would essentially authorize what this bill prohibits. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on June 5, 2014.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Kate Segal (D) on June 5, 2014, to authorize what this bill prohibits. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on June 5, 2014.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Phil Cavanagh (D) on June 5, 2014, to essentially authorize what this bill prohibits, and undo the 2001 law that created the prohibition. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on June 5, 2014.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Tom McMillin (R) on June 5, 2014, to remove the law's retroactive prohibition of lawsuits for insurance company actions taken before the 2001 preemption law, but create a July 1, 2014 deadline for filing such a suit. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on June 5, 2014.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Klint Kesto (R) on June 5, 2014, to remove the law's retroactive prohibition of lawsuits that have already been filed for insurance company actions taken before the 2001 preemption law. The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on June 5, 2014.
  2. Passed 57 to 49 in the House on June 5, 2014, to clarify that a prohibition of "unfair practices" lawsuits against insurance companies under the state Consumer Protection Act (rather than the state's Insurance Code) applies even if the cause of action occurred before a 2001 law was enacted specifying that industries like insurance which are already subject to a comprehensive state regulatory regime are not covered by the Consumer Protection Act. Lawsuits that have already been filed could still proceed, however.
    Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

  3. Received in the Senate on June 10, 2014.
    • Referred to the Senate Insurance Committee on June 10, 2014.
      • Reported in the Senate on June 11, 2014, with the recommendation that the bill pass.
  4. Passed 24 to 13 in the Senate on June 12, 2014, to clarify that a prohibition of "unfair practices" lawsuits against insurance companies under the state Consumer Protection Act (rather than the state's Insurance Code) applies even if the cause of action occurred before a 2001 law was enacted specifying that industries like insurance which are already subject to a comprehensive state regulatory regime are not covered by the Consumer Protection Act. Lawsuits that have already been filed could still proceed, however.
    Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

  5. Motion by Sen. Gretchen Whitmer (D) on June 12, 2014, to give the bill immediate effect. The motion failed 25 to 12 in the Senate on June 12, 2014.
    Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

  6. Motion by Sen. Arlan Meekhof (R) on June 12, 2014, that the bill be given immediate effect. The motion failed 25 to 10 in the Senate on June 12, 2014.
    Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"

  7. Signed by Gov. Rick Snyder on June 21, 2014.

Comments