Experience, expertise and common sense.

First-Party (PIP)

Motor Vehicle Litigation / April 19, 2019

Court/Case No: Oakland County Circuit Court/18-165514-NF

Tried/Argued Before: Judge

Demand: $89,223.56

Verdict: $0 – Motion for Summary Disposition granted

Name of Judge(s): Honorable Hala Jarbou

Keys to the Case:

This was a first-party action for the recovery of PIP benefits. Plaintiff claimed an entitlement to benefits under a commercial auto policy insuring his vehicle. The policy was only issued to the business; therefore, his name was not on the policy. He claimed the vehicle was used for business purposes, but could not produce any documentation confirming this. In fact, he had no documentation that the business existed. Importantly, the vehicle was personally titled and registered to him, not the business.

Eventually, Defendant filed a Motion for Summary Disposition arguing that Plaintiff, as the sole owner and registrant, must be precluded from PIP benefits because he did not personally insure the vehicle as required by the No-Fault Act
(MCL 500.3113). Defendant also argued that Plaintiff could not overcome the exclusionary provision of the No-Fault Act because the business did not have an insurable interest in the vehicle.

The trial court adopted all of Defendant’s arguments, including that this case was identical to Amerisure Ins Co v Auto-Owners Ins. Co., 262 Mich App 10 (2004). Amerisure also involved a vehicle that was personally owned, but insured under a policy issued to a business only. The Court of Appeals in Amerisure ruled that PIP benefits were not owed because the business did not have an insurable interest in the vehicle.

The trial court granted Defendant’s Motion for Summary Disposition and dismissed Plaintiff and an intervening medical provider’s claims with prejudice.

Defense SW attorney(s) Involved in Case:


Quality legal representation is the result of knowledge, economy & hard work

Best Law Firms - 2024