Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 104237; Unpublished
Judges Sullivan, Wahls, and Cavanagh; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
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 grant of summary disposition in favor of defendant Auto Club, denying PIP benefits to plaintiff on the basis of §3113(b) which precludes claims where the involved vehicle was not insured as required by § 3101.
Plaintiff had moved from Michigan to California in 1984, and returned to Michigan only infrequently and briefly to visit his family. In California, plaintiff owned a vehicle insured in California by the Auto Club of Southern California. Plaintiff also owned a vehicle in Michigan which was insured by the Auto Club of Michigan, and which was used by plaintiff’s wife. Plaintiff was injured in an accident occurring in California, while operating his California vehicle which was insured in California. Upon denial by the Auto Club of Southern California of plaintiff’s claim for PIP benefits, suit was commenced in Michigan against Auto Club of Michigan. The trial court granted summary disposition in favor of defendant, on the basis of the provisions of §3113(b) which, at the time of plaintiff’s accident, provided that a person is not entitled to be paid PIP benefits for injuries where the person is the owner of a motor vehicle involved in the accident and which is not insured as required by §3101.
On appeal, plaintiff contended that §3113(b) was inapplicable because the motor vehicle involved in the accident was "not required to be registered under § 3101" of the Michigan No-Fault Act.
In rejecting this argument, the Court of Appeals held that plaintiff’s interpretation of §3113(b) would yield an absurd result. The provisions of §3113(b) simply state that the owner or registrant of a car which, at the time of the accident, has no security as required by §3101, is not entitled to receive PIP benefits for bodily injury resulting from the accident. Therefore, the entry of summary disposition in favor of defendant was affirmed.
