Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket #251522; Unpublished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)]
Resident Relative [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In this unanimous unpublished per curiam opinion decided without oral argument, the Court of Appeals affirmed summary disposition for defendant insurance company on plaintiff’s claim for benefits under his mother’s no-fault insurance policy which provided coverage for relatives related by blood who primarily reside with the insured. At the time of plaintiff’s accident, plaintiff’s parents were divorced and plaintiff’s father had physical custody of plaintiff. In affirming, the court found that although plaintiff was obviously related to his mother, he primarily resided with his father. In this regard, it stated:
“It is undisputed that plaintiff’s primary residence was his father’s home and that he was actually residing there at the time of the accident. As Dixon’s son, plaintiff was obviously a blood relative. But, even assuming plaintiff also resided with Dixon by virtue of the visitation arrangement, . . . reasonable minds could not differ in concluding that plaintiff did not reside there ‘primarily’ when he spent the majority of his time living in his father’s house. Therefore, the trial court did not err in granting defendant’s motion.”
