Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket #251605; Unpublished
Judges Murray, Markey and O’Connell; unanimous; per curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not applicable, Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Determination of Domicile [3114(1)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous unpublished per curiam opinion decided without oral argument, the Court of Appeals affirmed summary disposition for defendant on plaintiff’s claim that he was a resident of his mother’s home for no-fault insurance purposes. In this case, plaintiff claimed he was covered under his mother’s no-fault insurance policy which provided coverage for herself and any members of her household. In finding that plaintiff did not live with his mother and was therefore not covered under her policy, the court noted that plaintiff stayed at his girlfriend’s apartment several nights a week until he lost his job. Two months after he lost his job he asked his mother and step-father if he could live with them to save on expenses but they refused and instead loaned him money. This exchange, which occurred two weeks before the plaintiff’s accident, contradicts his assertion that he lived with his mother at the time of the accident. In this regard, the court stated:
“While we are not sure what plaintiff’s permanent residence was, we are sure that his bare intention eventually to reside at his mother’s house did not render him a resident there. . . . Plaintiff sought, and was denied, permission to reside at his mother’s house. He accepted a loan as consolation and was admittedly living at his girlfriend’s apartment at the time of the accident. Because plaintiff failed to establish that he resided with his mother, the trial court correctly granted defendant’s motion for summary disposition.”
