Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 107944; Unpublished
Judges Cynar, Cavanagh, and Kaufman; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Scope of Mandated Coverages [§3131(1)]
Liability Exclusions Prohibiting Stacking of Coverages [§3131]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals again dealt with the issue of stacking liability insurance policies and the construction of an "anti-stacking" provision. The operative facts are as follows: Daniel McNerney was driving a 1985 Ford Bronco owned by his wife Terry McNerney when it collided with a vehicle driven by Julie Tiedman resulting in Ms. Tiedman's death. The Ford Bronco was insured under an auto no-fault policy issued by State Farm that listed both Mr. and Mrs. McNerney as the named insureds. Mr. McNerney also owned a 1977 GMC Pickup that was insured on a separate policy issued by State Farm and which only listed Mr. McNerney as the sole named insured. Both State Farm policies included an identical "anti-stacking provision" that read as follows:
"If There Is Other Liability Coverage
1. Policies Issued by Us to You.
If two or more vehicle liability policies issued by us to you apply to the same accident, the total limits of liability under all such policies shall not exceed that of the policy with the highest limit of liability."
The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's ruling that this anti-stacking provision was clear and unambiguous and was enforceable so as to limit coverage to the policy that had the highest limit of liability. The fact that the named insureds were not identical under both State Farm policies was not determinative. The court held:
"Because Mr. McNerney is the sole named insured on the GMC truck policy while he and Mrs. McNerney are named coinsureds on the Bronco II policy, defendants urge this Court to hold that the anti-stacking provisions are inapplicable since the named insureds are not identical. We decline to read the policy language in such an artificial manner.
The fact that Mr. McNerney is named as the sole insured on one policy and a coinsured on another policy does not make the anti-stacking provisions inapplicable. The exclusionary language is clear and unambiguous, and its effect is indisputable: if two insurance policies list the same insured and that person is involved in a traffic accident, coverage is available only under the policy with the highest limit, regardless of whether the policies are issued to separate vehicles and whether other persons are also listed as named insureds."
