Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket Nos. 146484 and 149491; Unpublished
Judges Gribbs, Weaver, and Hathaway; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Determination of Domicile [§3114(1)]
Equal Priority Situations [§3114(6)]
Interest Penalty Between Insurers [§3142]
Penalty Attorney Fees Between Insurers [§3148]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous unpublished per curiam Opinion involving a priority dispute between two insurers regarding the domicile of an accident victim, the Court of Appeals affirmed summary disposition in favor of plaintiff-insurer because there existed no genuine issue of material fact regarding domicile. The court articulated the factors which should be taken into consideration in determining domicile, which include the factors taken into consideration in the cases of Workman v DADE (Item No. 143) and Dairyland Insurance Co v Auto Owners Insurance Co (Item No. 619). Based upon these factors, the injured person clearly resided in the home of his mother, thus entitling plaintiff Auto Owners' summary disposition.
The court also concluded that plaintiff Auto Owners was not entitled to the no-fault interest under §3142 as interest under this section "does not apply to subrogation actions between insurers." Moreover, Auto Owners was not entitled to an award of attorney fees under §3148, as Auto Owners "had not advised or represented the claimant."
