Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 115091; Unpublished
Judges Holbrook, Jr., Hood, and R.B. Burns; 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 per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals addressed a stacking issue regarding liability coverage under a single policy issued to the individual defendants, Mark Stoltz, who was the driver of the vehicle which struck and killed plaintiff, and Francis Stoltz, the owner of the vehicle.
The insurance policy in question was for two vehicles, one owned by Mark Stoltz, and the other by his father. The declarations page of the policy showed a $50,000 liability limit applicable to each vehicle. The limits of liability clause of the policy stated that the limit of liability shown "in the declarations page for this coverage" was the maximum limit of liability for all damages resulting from any one auto accident, regardless of the number of covered persons, claims made, vehicles or premiums shown on the declaration, or vehicles involved in the auto accident.
In reversing the trial court finding that plaintiff was entitled to stack liability coverages for $100,000 of coverage, the court referred to the decision in Inman v Hartford Insurance Group (Item No. 1230). In that case, the plaintiff had sought to stack liability coverages in a policy which provided for a "per person" limit of $100,000. In Inman, two vehicles were involved in an illegal race injuring the plaintiff. In that case, the Court of Appeals denied stacking based upon the unambiguous language of the policy limiting liability coverage to $100,000. In this case, although the limit of liability language refers to the "declaration page" rather than to a specific amount "per person," nevertheless, the Court of Appeals held that the declarations page clearly showed that the liability undertaken was $50,000. Since the limit of liability language of the policy specified that the limit shown in the declarations page was the maximum coverage irrespective of the number of covered persons, claims made, vehicles or premiums shown, or vehicles involved, the language of the policy was unambiguous and stacking was disallowed.
