Upstairs Downstairs? – Court of Appeals Says It’s All in the Family

Domicile is a recurring theme in recent decisions by the Court of Appeals. Only last week, the Court ruled similarly in Aminah Johnson v Home-Owners Ins., Co., et al, summarized in the Firm’s November 4, 2020 No-Fault Newsline. In Johnson, the Court again looked to Workman and Dairyland in determining the domicile of the plaintiff.

Additionally, in July 2020, Secrest Wardle issued a “primer” on the issue of domicile v residency following an unpublished decision in which the Court of Appeals overturned the lower court’s granting of a motion for summary decision in favor of the defendant finding that the trial court had improperly conflated the concepts of “domicile” and “residency.”

It appears reasonable to suggest that when determining “domicile” and whether there is a qualification for benefits under MCL 500.3114(1), a well-rounded view of all evidence should be weighed before closing the door on the issue of where the plaintiff resides.

To access the full article: https://bit.ly/3kjjPzp