Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 115032; Unpublished
Judges Kelly, Wahls, and Sawyer; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Standards for Deductibility of State and Federal Governmental Benefits [§3109(1)]
Veterans / Military Benefits [§3109(1)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals held that defendant no-fault insurer was entitled to subtract from no-fault benefits owed plaintiff, any medical expense benefits paid to plaintiff as a member of the United States Armed Forces by the federal government pursuant to 10 USC 1071, et seq.
Plaintiff was a member of the military and was seriously injured in an automobile accident in Michigan while home on leave. Plaintiff was not the insured under defendant's no-fault policy, nor was he the spouse of the insured, or a relative of either domiciled in the same household. Therefore, the court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Crowley v DAIIE (Item No. 1022) controlled the disposition of this case, rather than the decision in Tatum v GEICO (Item No. 1172). Had plaintiff been the insured person, a spouse of the insured, or a resident relative of either, then plaintiff would have been in a category of persons to whom defendant was required to offer coordinated benefits coverage. If defendant had not offered coordinated coverage, the Tatum decision would control, and no setoff would have been permitted under the governmental benefits subtraction provisions of §3109(1).