Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 78-3727; Published
Judges R. B. Burns, Holbrook, and Burdick; Unanimous
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 93 Mich App 399; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Non-Stacking of PIP Benefits [§3115(3)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Legislative Purpose and Intent
CASE SUMMARY:
In a unanimous Opinion, the Court of Appeals held that where a plaintiff had purchased two separate policies of no-fault insurance, he was nevertheless precluded by §3115(3) of the statute from recovering no-fault benefits from each of the two insurance policies for a single loss. In characterizing this case as one of "first impression" the Court held that the words "a limit" as used in §3115(3) evidence a legislative intent to limit the plaintiff to one recovery regardless of the number of policies issued.
However, the Court was very clear to point out that it would not rule out the possibility of recovering under two no-fault policies if the injuries are in excess of the applicable no-fault policy limits. In this case, the plaintiff’s losses were less than the policy limits. Thus, the plaintiff would be effecting a duplicative recovery. However, where a person sustains losses in excess of those compensable by no-fault benefits, a different result may occur with regard to permitting such a person to recover excess losses under a second policy.