The plaintiff, Igal Shapiro, claimed insurance benefits from Economical Mutual Insurance Company (his father's insurer) or compensation from the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund after being hit by an unidentified driver.
Economical and the Superintendent of Financial Services brought motions for summary judgment to dismiss the claim, arguing that the plaintiff failed to prove he was hit by an "unidentified automobile" as defined by the Insurance Act and the MVAC Act, and did not make reasonable efforts to identify the driver.
The court found that the plaintiff did not meet his burden of proving injury by an "unidentified motorist" and that the evidence presented was insufficient to raise a genuine issue for trial.
The motions for summary judgment were granted, dismissing the plaintiff's action against Economical and implicitly against the Superintendent.
