Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 85534; Published
Judges Kelly, Shepherd, and Simon; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 152 Mich App 701; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Definition of Motor Vehicle (General) [§3101(2)(e)]
Exclusion for Parked Vehicles Covered by Workers Comp [§3106(2)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Workers Disability Compensation Act (MCL 418.1, et seq.)
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals ruled that a stripped down motor home chassis, although capable of being operated on a highway, was not in fact "designed primarily for operation on a highway," and therefore was not a motor vehicle within the definition of §3101(2)(c).
Plaintiff was injured while in the process of loading a tractor-trailer with the stripped down motor home chassis. This process involved driving the chassis onto the trailer, during which process the plaintiff was injured. Plaintiff received workers' compensation benefits from his employer, and at the same time applied for no-fault insurance benefits from defendants.
In interpreting §3106 of the No-Fault Statute, the Court of Appeals noted that this section, as recently amended, restricts the recovery of no-fault benefits in situations where workers' compensation benefits are also available. In this context, no-fault benefits are available to an employee only if the injury arose from the use or operation of "another vehicle." In reaching its decision, the Court of Appeals, in reliance upon the decision of Ebernickel v State Farm Mutual Insurance Company (Item No. 829), held that in order to satisfy the definition of a "motor vehicle" the vehicle must be "primarily designed" for operation oh a public highway. The fact that the stripped down chassis "could be" or "had been previously" operated on a highway was not determinative according to this decision. The absence of a body, hood, windshield, or a permanent seat was determinative.
