Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 117690; Unpublished
Judges Gillis, MacKenzie, and Weaver; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Exclusion for Vehicles Considered Parked [§3106(1)]
Exception for Unreasonably Parked Vehicles [§3106(1)(a)]
Nature of Survivor’s Loss Benefits [§3108(1)]
Disqualification for Uninsured Owners or Registrants of Involved Motor Vehicles or Motorcycles [§3113(b)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's order granting plaintiff’s motion for summary disposition in a case involving plaintiff’s entitlement to survivors' loss benefits and interpretation of the provisions of §3113(b), which precludes such benefits where an uninsured motor vehicle owned by the injured person was involved in the accident.
Plaintiff’s decedent stopped to help a motorist whose automobile was stuck in a ditch. Part of the automobile was protruding slightly onto the roadway. The vehicle had its headlights and parking lights on. Plaintiff’s decedent parked his Torino in the southbound lane facing north with low beam headlights on so that he could see to hook the chains onto the disabled vehicle. Plaintiff’s decedent parked the Torino close to the edge of the road and several feet south of the vehicle in the ditch. A southbound driver struck plaintiff’s decedent who was near the portion of the stalled vehicle which was slightly protruding onto the roadway. The southbound driver then ran into plaintiff’s decedent's Torino.
The Torino owned by plaintiff’s decedent was uninsured on the date of the accident. The striking vehicle was insured by Wolverine. When plaintiff sought survivors' loss benefits pursuant to §3108, defendant denied the benefits claiming that §3113(b) precluded benefits because the plaintiff’s decedent was the owner of an uninsured motor vehicle "involved in the accident." The insurance company contended that the Torino was involved in the accident if it fell within the parked vehicle exception of §3106, which provides that accidental bodily injury does not arise out of the ownership, operation, maintenance or use of a parked vehicle as a motor vehicle, unless the vehicle was parked in such a way as to cause unreasonable risk of the bodily injury which occurred.
With regard to the issue of whether the vehicle was parked in such a way as to cause unreasonable risk of bodily injury, as provided in §3106(l)(b), the trial court concluded that the parked vehicle exception did not apply, because the parked vehicle was not involved in the accident. In affirming the trial court, the Court of Appeals held that §3106 requires that the injury which occurred be caused by the manner in which the vehicle was parked. The Court of Appeals held that defendant offered no evidence that the vehicle was parked in such a way as to cause unreasonable risk of the bodily injury which occurred.
