Injured? Contact Sinas Dramis for a free consultation.

   

Lambert v Made Sherman and Farmers Insurance Exchange and State Farm Mutual Insurance Company; (COA-UNP, 10/23/1998; RB #2022)

Print

Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 195982; Unpublished  
Judges Holbrook, Jr., Markey, and Whitbeck; Unanimous; Per Curiam  
Official Michigan Reporter Citation:  Not Applicable; Link to Opinion alt   


STATUTORY INDEXING:  
Disqualification for Uninsured Owners or Registrants of Involved Motor Vehicles or Motorcycles [§3113(b)]  
Exclusion for Vehicles Considered Parked [§3106(1)]  

TOPICAL INDEXING:  
Not Applicable   


CASE SUMMARY:  
In this unanimous per curiam unpublished Opinion, the Court of Appeals held that the injured person was not entitled to receive PIP benefits because his uninsured motor vehicle was involved in the accident, thus disqualifying him from benefits under §3113(b).

In this case, the plaintiff was driving his uninsured Escort when it stalled on the road. He telephoned a friend who then drove to the scene in another uninsured vehicle (a Tempo) owned by the plaintiff. The vehicles were stopped in the curb lane with flashers activated. Plaintiff’s girlfriend remained seated in the Tempo, kept the engine running, and was intending to push plaintiff’s Escort to a safer place. Plaintiff got his Escort started and was walking back to his Tempo to talk to his friend when a third automobile approached. Plaintiff attempted to run between the Escort and his Tempo and was injured when the third automobile struck plaintiff’s Tempo automobile in the rear which then struck plaintiff.

The Court of Appeals held that under §3113(b), as a matter of law, the plaintiff’s Tempo was not "parked" for the purposes of the No-Fault Act. Therefore, the parked automobile provisions contained in §3106 were not relevant to the determination of whether the Tempo was "involved" in the accident under Heard v State Farm (Item No. 538). In holding that the Tempo was "involved" the accident for purposes of §3113(b), the court noted that the Tempo was being operated on a public road at the time of the accident and was therefore being used as a motor vehicle at the time of the accident. Plaintiff was not entitled to PIP benefits because he was the owner or registrant of an uninsured vehicle that was involved in the accident.  


Michigan auto accident attorney Stephen Sinas is the lead editor of the appellate case summaries published on this site regarding the Michigan auto insurance law. To learn more about how Stephen Sinas and how the Sinas Dramis Law Firm can help you if you have been injured in a Michigan auto accident, visit SinasDramis.com.

Copyright © 2024  Sinas Dramis Law Firm, George Sinas, Stephen Sinas.
All Rights Reserved.
Login (Publishers Only)

FacebookInstagram