Barnes v. Farmers Insurance Exchange
308 Mich. App. 1
Mich. Ct. App.2014Background
- Plaintiff sustained injuries in a 2004 auto accident while driving a Cavalier titled to Burton and plaintiff.
- Only Huling had insurance on the Cavalier; title holders Burton and plaintiff did not insure the vehicle.
- Huling allegedly used the Cavalier; he had a State Farm no-fault policy for his own use.
- Plaintiff sought PIP benefits under Huling's policy after State Farm denied benefits.
- Trial court granted State Farm’s summary disposition; Farmers later sought summary disposition, arguing no owner with coverage.
- Appellate court affirmed the trial court, holding no owner with required PIP coverage existed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does lack of insurance by any vehicle owner bar PIP benefits? | Iqbal allows recovery if any insured vehicle exists; owner status not required. | MCL 500.3113(b) requires an owner to have coverage; without it, no PIP. | Yes, lack of owner coverage bars PIP. |
| Does Iqbal broadly permit recovery when vehicle is insured by a non-owner? | Vehicle insurance by Huling supports plaintiff's PIP claim regardless of ownership. | Iqbal limited to scenarios where vehicle is insured; ownership ties are still controlling. | Iqbal does not permit recovery when no owner has coverage; vehicle must be insured. |
| Is Huling an owner for purposes of MCL 500.3113(b) such that Cavalier’s lack of owner coverage precludes recovery? | Security of insurance attaches to the vehicle, not the owner; Huling’s policy suffices. | Huling was not an owner; no owner had required coverage. | Huling not an owner; no owner with coverage existed; plaintiff barred from PIP. |
Key Cases Cited
- Iqbal v Bristol West Ins Group, 278 Mich App 31 (2008) (vehicle insurance prioridade; owners' coverage not strictly required)
- Jasinski v Nat’l Indemnity Ins Co, 151 Mich App 812 (1986) (no-fault satisfied when titled owner maintained coverage)
- State Farm Mut Auto Ins Co v Sentry Ins Co, 91 Mich App 109 (1979) (owners need not each have separate policy)
- State Farm Fire & Cas Co v Old Republic Ins Co, 466 Mich 142 (2002) (statutory ownership/insurance linkage interpreted strictly)
- US Fidelity & Guaranty Co v Mich Catastrophic Claims Ass’n (On Rehearing), 484 Mich 1 (2009) (clarifies no-fault act interpretation on coverage)
- Mich Ed Ass’n v Secretary of State (On Rehearing), 489 Mich 194 (2011) (statutory interpretation guiding no-fault priority)