Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 71480; Published
Judges Shepherd, Beasley, and Caprathe; 2-1 (with J. Beasley Dissenting)
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 137 Mich App 528; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Obligations of Admitted Insurers to Pay PIP Benefits on Behalf of Nonresidents Injured in Michigan [§3163(1)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Revised Judicature Act – Miscellaneous Provisions
CASE SUMMARY:
In this 2-1 Opinion by Judge Shepherd, the Court of Appeals held that the courts of Michigan may exercise long-arm jurisdiction over defendant Allstate Insurance Company of Canada in a suit filed by a Canadian citizen against Allstate of Canada for no-fault benefits as a result of an automobile accident which occurred in Michigan. Previous to this accident, Allstate of Canada had voluntarily filed a "certificate of compliance" with Michigan No-Fault pursuant to §3163 of the statute. Under this section, an insurer certifies that "any accidental bodily injury or property damage occurring in this state arising from the ownership, operation, maintenance or use of a motor vehicle as a motor vehicle by an out-of-state resident who is insured under its automobile liability insurance policies shall be subject to the personal and property protection insurance system set forth in this Act"
The accident in question occurred in Michigan. Plaintiff was the passenger in a car owned and driven by a Canadian resident Defendant Allstate paid no-fault benefits to plaintiff for approximately a year and then discontinued benefits on the basis that plaintiff was no longer disabled. Plaintiff brought suit in the Wayne County Circuit Court seeking resumption of benefits.
In upholding the Wayne County Circuit Court's jurisdiction, Judge Shepherd, writing for the majority, stated:
"We find defendant's voluntary filing of a certificate of compliance with Michigan no-fault insurance laws to constitute a free and intentional act of involvement with the state of Michigan insofar as defendant might be subject to liability for accidents involving its insureds which occurred in this state. Defendant made a deliberate and presumably advantageous business decision to restrict its liability toward others when its insureds drove in this state in exchange for its agreement to pay no-fault insurance benefits where warranted without regard to fault We therefore find the requirements for long-arm jurisdiction under MCL 600.715(1) to be satisfied."
Judge Beasley dissented arguing that there was no public policy requiring Michigan to extend its jurisdiction to a Canadian contract action between Canadian litigants.
