Michigan Supreme Court; Docket No. #143627; Published
Justices Young, Markman, M. B. Kelly, and Zahra; 4-3; Per Curiam
Justice M. Kelly Dissenting, Joined by Justices Cavanagh and Hathaway
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 493 Mich 915 (2012); Link to Order
Underinsured Motorist Coverage: Setoffs Applicable to Underinsured Motorist Cases
Underinsured Motorist Coverage: Underinsured Motorist Coverage in General
The Supreme Court, after having granted leave to appeal, and after receiving briefs and hearing oral argument of the parties, summarily reversed the Court of Appeals in an order and held that underinsured motorist coverage with limits of $20,000 per person and $40,000 per accident was not illusory and therefore, defendant Foremost Ins Co was entitled to summary disposition on that issue. In so holding, the Court stated, “we have expressly rejected the notion that the perceived expectations of a party may override the clear language of a contract.” The Court went on to say, “when read as a whole, the clear language of the policy provides for combined uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage that, as promised, would have operated to supplement any recovery by [plaintiff] to insure that he received a total recovery of up to $20,000/$40,000 (the policy limit) had the other vehicle involved in the crash been either uninsured or insured in an amount less than $20,000/$40,000.”
Judge Marilyn Kelly dissented stating that the issues warrant a more detailed analysis than that which is set forth in this summary order. Justice Cavanagh joined Justice Kelly’s dissent. Justice Hathaway dissented separately stating that the Court of Appeals had reached the correct result in this case.