Uninsured motorist (UM) benefits; Motorcycle exclusion; Contract interpretation; Shay v Aldrich; Single accident; Summary disposition; Additional evidence on appeal; MCR 2.116(C)(10); Barnard Mfg Co, Inc v Gates Performance Eng’g, Inc

The court held that plaintiff was not entitled to UM benefits because her injuries occurred during one accident while she was occupying her own motorcycle, bringing the claim within the policy’s motorcycle exclusion. Plaintiff-Swanderski was riding her motorcycle when an unidentified driver struck it from behind, causing her to be ejected, and then almost immediately struck her person with the same vehicle before fleeing. The trial court granted summary disposition to defendant-State Farm on plaintiff’s UM claim, concluding that the two impacts arose from the same occurrence. On appeal, the court held that the policy was unambiguous when read as a whole because it excluded coverage for bodily injury sustained by an insured while occupying a motorcycle owned by the insured. The court rejected plaintiff’s attempt to characterize herself as a pedestrian at the moment of the second impact, noting that her own complaint repeatedly described the incident as “an automobile accident.” It reasoned that the accident began when plaintiff was on her motorcycle and ended when she was left in the roadway after being struck a second time by the same vehicle. The court also declined to consider affidavits from other motorcyclists who witnessed the event because review of a summary-disposition motion is limited to evidence properly presented to the trial court. Affirmed.