Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 152111; Unpublished
Judges Weaver, Murphy, and Jansen; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Liability Exclusions Prohibiting Stacking of Coverages [§3131]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Private Contract (Meaning and Intent)
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous unpublished per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court finding that coverages could not be "stacked" under the residual liability provisions of the policy based upon the conditions section of the policy which precludes such stacking.
The specific anti-stacking provision in the conditions section of the policy stated that "when two or more automobiles are insured hereunder, the terms of this policy shall apply separately to each ..."
In affirming the trial court determination of summary disposition, the Court of Appeals noted that it had construed a provision with language virtually identical to that in the case at bar in the case of Citizens Insurance Company of America v Tunney, 91 Mich App 223 (1979). In Tunney, supra, the Court of Appeals stated that it "has often been noted in cases from other jurisdictions that language stating that the terms of a policy shall apply separately to each insured vehicle simply makes the policy applicable to whichever automobile is involved in an accident"
The Court of Appeals held that the limits of liability, as stated on the declarations sheet, are exact. Further, the declarations sheet provides that the insurance afforded on each vehicle is specifically limited to the coverage limits for which a premium is assessed/paid. Therefore, the trial court did not err in determining that the terms of the policy precluded stacking.
