Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 168790; Published
Judges Doctoroff, Holbrook, Jr., McKenzie, Wahls, Hood, Gribbs, Sawyer, Weaver, Murphy, Griffin, Neff, Fitzgerald, and Taylor, (with Judges Doctoroff, Holbrook, McKenzie, Hood, Gribbs, Sawyer, and Fitzgerald, concurring; Justice Weaver, dissenting, with Judges Wahls, Griffin, Neff, and Taylor Concurring with the Dissent)
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 206 Mich App 7; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Compulsory Insurance Requirements for Owners or Registrants of Motor Vehicles Required to Be Registered [§3101(1)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Leased / Rented Vehicles
Motor Vehicle Code (Financial Responsibility Act) (MCL 257.501, et seq.)
CASE SUMMARY:
This case was before the Court of Appeals for a resolution pursuant to Administrative Order No. 1990-6 of a conflict in the decisions of the Court of Appeals. The question certified to the panel was as follows:
[W]hether pursuant to MCL 500.3101(1); MSA 24.13101(1) and MCL 257.520(b)(2); MSA 9.2220(b)(2) a car rental company may include in its rental agreement an option allowing the permissive user of a vehicle to provide his or her own primary residual liability insurance, as found in State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins Co v Snappy Car Rental, Inc, 196 Mich App 143; 492 NW2d 500 (1992), Iv den, 442 Mich 883 (1993); or whether the car rental company must provide primary residual liability insurance for a permissive user pursuant to its policy of insurance, as would have been the holding in State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins Co v Enterprise Leasing Co, unpublished per curiam of the Court of Appeals, decided September 30,1993 (No. 150077), absent Administrative Order 1990-6.
The majority opinion by Judge Murphy, in which Judges Doctoroff, Holbrook, McKenzie, Hood, Gribbs, Sawyer and Fitzgerald concurred, concluded that the decision in State Farm Mutual v Snappy Car Rental, supra, is the appropriate resolution, and accordingly, the trial court's grant of summary disposition in favor of State Farm was reversed and remanded. Thus, the holding by the majority in resolving this conflict is that under §3101(1), a car rental company may include in its rental agreement an option allowing the permissive user of a vehicle to provide his or her own primary residual liability insurance as was found in State Farm Mutual Insurance v Snappy Car Rental, Inc.
Judge Weaver in her dissent would hold that under §3101 (1) an owner's policy of liability insurance is required to provide primary residual liability insurance for any permissive user. The arguments in support of this position were set forth in State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co v Enterprise Leasing Co.
Judges Wahls, Griffin, Neff and Taylor concurred with Judge Weaver.
[Editor's Note: The above case was inadvertently omitted from prior summaries.]
