Michigan Supreme Court; Docket No. 66541; Published
Opinion by______; Per Curiam; Unanimous
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 413 Mich 567; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Obligations of Admitted Insurers to Pay PIP Benefits on Behalf of Nonresidents Injured in Michigan [§3163(1)]
Rights and Immunities Applicable to Nonresident Claimants and Foreign Insurers [§3163(3)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Legislative Purpose and Intent
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous per curiam Opinion issued in lieu of granting leave to appeal, the Supreme Court resolved the conflict within the Court of Appeals over the interpretation of the foreign insurer provisions of §3163 of the Act The Court accepted the analysis of the Court of Appeals in the case of Guibord v Farmers Insurance (item number 457) and held that the insurer of an out-of-state motorcycle is not responsible to pay no-fault benefits to the operator of the motorcycle who was injured in Michigan in an accident with a motor vehicle insured in Michigan. In this situation, the responsibility for payment of benefits rests with the insurer of the Michigan vehicle. The Court held that under §3163, a foreign insurer who files the appropriate certificate in Michigan is only obligated to pay benefits where the injury arises from the ownership, operation, maintenance or use of a motor vehicle "by an out-of-state resident" In this case, plaintiff Mills was driving a motorcycle which was struck by an automobile, so he was not using a motor vehicle. Presumably, had he been operating a motor vehicle at the time of injury, regardless of who owned it, the foreign insurer would have been responsible for the payment of benefits.
[Author's Comment: This opinion appears to clarify the foreign insurer's responsibilities to pay benefits under §3163 in at least those situations involving non-occupants (motorcyclists) and operators of motor vehicles. A question may exist, however, as to who would pay benefits if the foreign citizen were a passenger in a motor vehicle involved in an accident in Michigan. If being a passenger at the time of injury constitutes "use of a motor vehicle as a motor vehicle," then the foreign insurer would pay. However, if occupancy is not construed as use, then payment would rest with the insurer of the Michigan vehicle involved in the accident even though the foreign citizen may have been occupying his or her own vehicle. To avoid such a result, it would seem reasonable to construe occupancy as "use."]
