Ruthie Allen v. Allstate Insurance Company
330808
| Mich. Ct. App. | Mar 16, 2017Background
- In mid-2013 Allen planned to permanently move from Louisiana to her daughter Tara Hunter’s home in West Bloomfield, Michigan: she told family, moved many household items into a bedroom at Hunter’s house, changed mailing addresses for bank/benefits, and purchased a one‑way Greyhound ticket to Michigan for September 2013.
- While riding the bus to Michigan on September 14, 2013, Allen was severely injured in an interstate crash; she later received treatment at Beaumont Hospital in Michigan.
- Hunter had a no‑fault (PIP) policy issued by Allstate that covered “resident relatives” domiciled in the same household; Allen sought benefits under that provision.
- Allen sued Allstate for PIP benefits; Beaumont (provider) intervened seeking reimbursement for medical expenses. Parties filed cross‑motions for summary disposition; facts were undisputed and the sole legal issue was Allen’s domicile at the time of the accident.
- Trial court granted summary disposition for Allen and Beaumont, finding Allen had abandoned her Louisiana domicile and was domiciled with Hunter in Michigan; Allstate appealed.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed: applying the Workman–Dairyland factors (and following Williams), the court held Allen was domiciled with Hunter and therefore covered as a resident relative.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was Allen domiciled in Hunter’s Michigan household at the time of the accident? | Allen argues she intended to make Hunter’s home her permanent domicile, moved possessions there, changed mailing addresses, and bought a one‑way ticket to Michigan. | Allstate argues the common‑law rule requires physical presence at the intended domicile and contends post‑Grange courts should not apply Workman–Dairyland factors; thus Allen was not yet domiciled in Michigan. | Court applied Workman–Dairyland factors (and followed Williams) and held Allen had abandoned her Louisiana domicile and was domiciled with Hunter when injured, so PIP coverage applied. |
| Did Allstate waive any residency/domicile defense by not pleading it? | Allen contends failure to plead the defense was waiver under the court rules. | Allstate maintained its denial of coverage preserved the issue. | Court rejected Allen’s waiver argument and considered domicile on the merits. |
Key Cases Cited
- Grange Ins. Co. of Mich. v. Lawrence, 494 Mich 475 (discusses common‑law domicile and limits on applying Workman factors where domicile is set by operation of law)
- Workman v. Detroit Auto Inter‑Ins Exch., 404 Mich 477 (multifactor test for determining adult domicile in same household disputes)
- Williams v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 202 Mich App 491 (applied Workman–Dairyland factors to find plaintiff domiciled with parents after preparing to move back)
- Fowler v. Auto Club Ins. Ass’n, 254 Mich App 362 (when facts undisputed, domicile is question of law)