Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 117941; Unpublished
Judges Michael Kelly, Gillis, and Gribbs; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Not Applicable
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Private Contract (Meaning and Intent)
Uninsured Motorist Benefits: Uninsured Motorist Coverage in General
Uninsured Motorist Benefits: Exclusions from Uninsured Motorist Benefits
Uninsured Motorist Benefits: Arbitration of Uninsured Motorist Claims
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals denied uninsured motorist benefits to plaintiff who was struck by a hit-and-run vehicle while he was driving his motorcycle. Plaintiff sought uninsured motorist benefits under an automobile no-fault policy issued to his wife. The court enforced exclusionary language in the uninsured motorist portion of the policy that denied benefits where bodily injury was sustained by an insured person while occupying a motor vehicle owned by the named insured or a resident relative unless the vehicle occupied is the one listed on the declaration sheet. In denying benefits, the court stated: "The exclusion contained in defendant's policy was an other owned vehicle exclusion which was designed to prevent an insured from purchasing an insurance policy or particular type of insurance coverage with regard to only one vehicle, while leaving the rest of his vehicles uninsured, and receiving coverage for multiple vehicles for the price of one policy. Hence, where plaintiff was not injured in the vehicle described on the declaration certificate, he was not entitled to uninsured motorist coverage." The court also held that the issue of coverage was not arbitrable because the insurance policy specifically provides that disagreements concerning insurance coverage are not subject to arbitration unless otherwise agreed by express written consent of both parties. The insured did not consent to arbitration, therefore, arbitration was improper.