Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket # 324202; Unpublished
Judges Cavanagh, Riordan, and Gadola; Unanimous; Per Curiam
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: Not Applicable; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Determination of Domicile [§3114(1)]
Exception to General Priority for Non-Occupants [§3115(1)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous unpublished per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals held that a no-fault insurer was entitled to reimbursement for benefits it paid to an injured pedestrian because the pedestrian was domiciled with her father at the time of the accident, which made the father’s no-fault insurer higher in priority pursuant to MCL 500.3114(1).
Morgan Engelhardt was struck by a vehicle that was insured by plaintiff Automobile Club Insurance Association (ACIA). After paying PIP benefits, ACIA learned that Morgan’s father was insured with defendant Auto-Owners. ACIA then filed this reimbursement action, claiming that Auto-Owners was higher in priority because Morgan was domiciled with her father at the time of the accident. Testimony showed that Morgan occasionally resided with her father, as well as various other locations across the country at different times in her life. Morgan’s father testified that, at the time of the accident, Morgan was not staying with him, but he was paying her cell phone bill and her health insurance. Morgan also used her father’s address as her mailing address and listed it on her identification card and driver’s license. The trial court granted ACIA’s motion for summary disposition.
Relying on principles set forth in Workman v Detroit Auto Inter-Ins Exch, 404 Mich 477 (1979), and Dairyland Ins Co v Auto Owners Ins Co, 123 Mich App 675 (1983), the Court of Appeals held that Morgan was domiciled with her father and Auto-Owners was obligated to reimburse ACIA.
Applying Workman to the facts of this case, the Court of Appeals cited the testimony of Morgan’s father. The court noted that Morgan was free to come and go from her father’s home as she pleased, but that Morgan did not “reside with” her father at the time of the accident.
However, looking to Dairyland, the Court of Appeals pointed out the factors weighed in favor of Morgan being domiciled with her father, including: she used her father’s home as her mailing address; she kept personal possessions at her father’s home; she used her father’s address on her driver’s license and other documents; a room was maintained for her at the house; and her father was paying her cell phone bill and her health insurance.
Based on the foregoing analysis under Workman and Dairyland, the Court of Appeals concluded the trial court did not err in granting summary disposition for ACIA.
