Personal protection insurance (PIP) benefits; MCL 500.3114(6); MCL 500.3109a(2) exclusions; Love v Rudolph; Auto Club Insurance Association (ACIA)

Concluding the facts here were indistinguishable from those in Love, which was binding case precedent, the court held that plaintiff did “not fall into the category of persons excluded by MCL 500.3109a(1).” The plaintiff in Love was, like plaintiff here, “riding a motorcycle that was involved in an accident with a motor vehicle that was insured by a policy of insurance that contained an exclusion for allowable expenses benefits under MCL 500.3109a(2).” There was no dispute here “that plaintiff selected unlimited motor vehicle PIP coverage through” defendant-State Farm while the driver of the motor vehicle opted for coverage from defendant-ACIA “under the § 3109a(2) exclusion. Section 3109a(2) allows an insured who has qualified health coverage to cover injuries occurring due to a motor vehicle accident to select the $250,000-limit on allowable expenses and take an exclusion in exchange for a reduction in their premium, whereupon they are not eligible for PIP benefits.” The court held that, pursuant to Love, “ACIA was responsible for the payment of plaintiff’s no-fault benefits because it is the insurer of the owner and operator of the motor vehicle involved in the vehicle-motorcycle accident.” Thus, the trial court should have granted State Farm summary disposition instead of ACIA. The court reversed the order granting summary disposition against State Farm and the order denying summary disposition against ACIA, and remanded for entry of an order granting State Farm summary disposition.