67th Judicial District Court; Docket No.CVB-1292; Unpublished
Judge Charles B. Mosier; Written Opinion
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Specific Exclusions from Motor Vehicle Definition [§3101(2)(e)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Legislative Purpose and Intent
CASE SUMMARY:
In a lengthy written Opinion containing much statutory analysis, Judge Mosier concluded that an insured automobile operator or owner does not have tort immunity from claims alleging property damage to motorcycles. Accordingly, the motorcycle owner may sue the.insured driver for such property damage claims and recover the same in tort.
In so holding, Judge Mosier concluded that the "exclusions" of motorcycles from the no-fault scheme pursuant to §3101(2) evidences a legislative intent to exclude such vehicles from the purview of the tort abolishment section of the act (§3135) even though motorcycles are a part of the act for certain other specific purposes (i.e. no-fault coverage in nonoccupant situations pursuant to §3115). The court noted that a motorcycle owner is unable to obtain no-fault insurance and thus could never claim the same tort immunity provided to the insured automobile owner. Not being able to avail himself of the same shield as the automobile driver, the motorcyclist should not be limited by such a shield insofar as his tort remedies are concerned. To hold otherwise would raise "a serious constitutional question in reverse, by way of a denial of equal protection."
