Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 69517; Published
Judges Wahls, Maher, and Simon; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 137 Mich App 695; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
PIP Insurer’s Right to Reimbursement for Claims Paid Arising Out of Uninsured Vehicle Injuries [§3177(1)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Legislative Purpose and Intent
CASE SUMMARY:
In what appears to be a case of first impression, the Court of Appeals unanimously held in this per curiam opinion that the first-party recoupment provisions of §3177 are not limited to assigned claims facility cases. Therefore, in this case, the no-fault insurer of an accident victim's personal automobile was permitted to obtain recoupment of PIP benefits it paid to the victim from defendant who was the victim's uninsured employer. The defendant employer failed to carry any no-fault insurance on its trucks. Had such insurance been obtained, all employees of defendant injured while occupying the defendant's truck would have received PIP benefits from the employer's insurance company Pursuant to the priority provisions of §3114(3). Due to the fact that defendant did not carry no-fault insurance, the employee injured while occupying defendant's truck was required to obtain PIP benefits from his private automobile insurance company (the plaintiff). Plaintiff then filed this action for recoupment under §3177.
The Court noted that even though §3177 is physically located in that portion of the statute dealing with the assigned claims facility, its terms are not 50 limited. In addition, it is located at the end of the assigned claims provisions. Therefore, it could just as easily be used to refer to any action for recoupment rather than those specifically brought by insurers handling assigned claims cases.
