David Gurski v. Motorists Mutual Insurance Company
321 Mich. App. 657
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Plaintiff David Gurski was injured when a 1993 Jeep owned by Andy Frazier slipped into gear and ran over his leg while Gurski worked on it in Frazier’s shop.
- Frazier’s business, Frazier Construction, LLC, held a Farm Bureau commercial auto policy listing Frazier Construction as the named insured and Andy Frazier as a “designated insured.”
- The policy listed three vehicles (trailer, 2004 F250, 1993 Jeep); PIP premiums were shown only for the trailer and F250, not for the Jeep, which had only comprehensive coverage.
- The policy’s PIP endorsement defined who is an “insured” (including persons injured while not occupying a covered auto) but did not, by its declarations, treat the Jeep as covered for PIP.
- Plaintiff sued for PIP benefits; the trial court held Farm Bureau liable both under the policy language (because the Jeep was listed) and under statutory priority, MCL 500.3115(1), reasoning that Frazier (a designated insured) made Farm Bureau the owner-insurer.
- The Court of Appeals reversed, holding (1) the policy’s declarations unambiguously excluded PIP for the Jeep and (2) MCL 500.3115(1) applies only to insurers who provide PIP coverage to the owner, and Farm Bureau did not provide PIP to Mr. Frazier.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Farm Bureau policy’s PIP endorsement makes the Jeep a "covered auto" for PIP so Gurski can recover under the policy | Gurski: Jeep is listed on declarations and the endorsement entitles anyone injured while not occupying a covered auto to PIP | Farm Bureau: Declarations and premium schedule show no PIP premium for the Jeep; endorsement does not expand coverage to vehicles lacking PIP premiums | Court: Policy unambiguous — PIP applies only to autos with a PIP premium; Jeep lacked PIP coverage, so no PIP under the policy |
| Whether MCL 500.3115(1) makes Farm Bureau liable as the insurer of the Jeep’s owner despite Farm Bureau not providing PIP to that owner | Gurski: Owner (Frazier) appears as a designated insured; Pioneer permits recovery from an insurer of the owner even if that insurer didn’t insure the specific vehicle | Farm Bureau: Designated-insured status only provides liability coverage; Farm Bureau did not insure Frazier for PIP and thus is not an insurer for priority purposes | Court: MCL 500.3115(1) contemplates insurers who provide PIP; Farm Bureau did not provide PIP to Frazier, so it is not an insurer of the owner under §3115(1) |
Key Cases Cited
- Pioneer State Mut. Ins. Co. v. Titan Ins. Co., 252 Mich. App. 330 (interpreting MCL 500.3115(1) and recognizing recovery from an insurer of the owner when the owner has PIP through other vehicles)
- DAIIE v. Home Ins. Co., 428 Mich. 43 (Legislative intent favors insuring persons rather than particular vehicles)
- Universal Underwriters Group v. Allstate Ins. Co., 246 Mich. App. 713 (statutory and priority principles in no-fault insurance)
- Dawley v. Hall, 319 Mich. App. 490 (corporate entity is distinct from its members; relevant to whether LLC’s policy covers individual owner)