Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 66786; Published
Judges Wood, Wahls, and Dodge; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 129 Mich App 382; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Scope of Mandated Coverages [§3131(1)]
Liability Policy Exclusions for Owned and Non-Owned Vehicles [§3131]
Liability Exclusions Prohibiting Stacking of Coverages [§3131]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
This decision also deals with the validity of a "non-owned vehicle exclusion" and an attempt to stack policies from uninvolved vehicles. The involved vehicle in this case (a 1967 Mustang) was owned by William Golemba and insured by DAIIE. At the time of the accident it was driven by Golemba's son Steven. William Golemba also had two other automobiles which were insured by DAIIE. Steven Golemba was insured as the principal operator under the policy covering the '67 Mustang. The Court of Appeals refused to stack the liability coverages from William Golemba's two other automobiles on the basis of the "non-owned vehicle exclusion" in those particular policies. Each of those policies stated that they would provide liability coverage to any owned vehicle listed in the declaration sheet and any non-owned vehicle not available for the regular use of the insured. The Mustang was not listed on the declaration sheets of these other policies and thus was not an "owned" vehicle. It was also not a "non-owned vehicle" because William Golemba was titleholder. Therefore, those policies could not be stacked. In so holding, the Court was careful to point out that the issue was not "the portability of Steven Golemba's insurance coverage." He was driving the mustang and was insured as the principal operator of that vehicle under the policy. Thus, the Supreme Court's opinion in State Farm v Ruuska (item number 487) was distinguished and not applied.
