By Ben Solis
Gongwer News Service
A household exclusion provision in any given no-fault auto insurance policy’s bodily-injury coverage limits coverage under the Insurance code to $250,000, the Court of Appeals ruled in a unanimous decision issued Monday.
In a per curiam published opinion, the panel in MemberSelect Insurance Company v. Partipilo (COA Docket No. 368674) affirmed the Monroe Circuit Court’s grant of summary disposition to the defendant in the case, which argued the limit was $250,000, not $50,000, as the plaintiff insurance company argued.
The case arose from an auto crash that killed a woman in 2021. The vehicle in which the death occurred was insured by the plaintiff. It was also the vehicle that caused the crash, resulting in the deaths of the defendants. Their estates represented them in court when they were sued by the plaintiff.
The insurance company sued the estates claiming that, according to the policy’s exclusions, “minimum limit mandated by the motor vehicle financial responsibility law of Michigan” was $50,000, and, under the exclusion, that was the liability coverage limit for the policy governing the wife’s estate claims.
The defendants moved for summary disposition because the husband and wife never elected the lower limits and the minimum liability limit for the crash allowed under state law was $250,000 per individual and $500,000 per crash. The insurance company counter-argued with its own motion for summary disposition that the provision for electing the lower liability coverage amount sets coverage at $50,000 and $250,000 is only a default coverage level. In that scenario, the $50,000 limit was applicable to the resident-relative household exclusion limit for the wife’s death.
The circuit court ruled that state law clearly sets the limit at $250,000 and $500,000 even though the law allows consumers to elect a lower coverage limit.
Upon appeal, the panel of Judge Adrienne Young, Judge Michael Kelly and Judge Kathleen Feeney in MemberSelect looked to its precedent in Progressive Marathon Insurance Company v Espinoza-Solis. The court in that case concluded that “the statutorily required minimum, and hence the amount for which Progressive was still liable despite the noncooperation of its insured, was $250,000 per person and $500,000 per accident.”
“While the coverage issue in Espinoza-Solis concerned noncooperation by the insured compared with the present case involving the household exclusion, that distinction does not affect the ultimate conclusion,” the panel wrote. “The holding in Espinoza-Solis … is clear: ‘We hold that the statutorily required minimum residual liability insurance for policies issued after July 1, 2020, is $250,000 per person and $500,000 per accident, pursuant to MCL 500.3009(1)(a) and (b), unless the proper steps are followed to exercise the option of selecting a lower coverage amount under MCL 500.3009(5).’ There is no indication in this case that the insureds did opt for the lower coverage amount. Therefore, the holding in Espinoza-Solis compels the conclusion in this case that the liability limits are $250,000 per person and $500,000 per accident.”
Gongwer News Service
A household exclusion provision in any given no-fault auto insurance policy’s bodily-injury coverage limits coverage under the Insurance code to $250,000, the Court of Appeals ruled in a unanimous decision issued Monday.
In a per curiam published opinion, the panel in MemberSelect Insurance Company v. Partipilo (COA Docket No. 368674) affirmed the Monroe Circuit Court’s grant of summary disposition to the defendant in the case, which argued the limit was $250,000, not $50,000, as the plaintiff insurance company argued.
The case arose from an auto crash that killed a woman in 2021. The vehicle in which the death occurred was insured by the plaintiff. It was also the vehicle that caused the crash, resulting in the deaths of the defendants. Their estates represented them in court when they were sued by the plaintiff.
The insurance company sued the estates claiming that, according to the policy’s exclusions, “minimum limit mandated by the motor vehicle financial responsibility law of Michigan” was $50,000, and, under the exclusion, that was the liability coverage limit for the policy governing the wife’s estate claims.
The defendants moved for summary disposition because the husband and wife never elected the lower limits and the minimum liability limit for the crash allowed under state law was $250,000 per individual and $500,000 per crash. The insurance company counter-argued with its own motion for summary disposition that the provision for electing the lower liability coverage amount sets coverage at $50,000 and $250,000 is only a default coverage level. In that scenario, the $50,000 limit was applicable to the resident-relative household exclusion limit for the wife’s death.
The circuit court ruled that state law clearly sets the limit at $250,000 and $500,000 even though the law allows consumers to elect a lower coverage limit.
Upon appeal, the panel of Judge Adrienne Young, Judge Michael Kelly and Judge Kathleen Feeney in MemberSelect looked to its precedent in Progressive Marathon Insurance Company v Espinoza-Solis. The court in that case concluded that “the statutorily required minimum, and hence the amount for which Progressive was still liable despite the noncooperation of its insured, was $250,000 per person and $500,000 per accident.”
“While the coverage issue in Espinoza-Solis concerned noncooperation by the insured compared with the present case involving the household exclusion, that distinction does not affect the ultimate conclusion,” the panel wrote. “The holding in Espinoza-Solis … is clear: ‘We hold that the statutorily required minimum residual liability insurance for policies issued after July 1, 2020, is $250,000 per person and $500,000 per accident, pursuant to MCL 500.3009(1)(a) and (b), unless the proper steps are followed to exercise the option of selecting a lower coverage amount under MCL 500.3009(5).’ There is no indication in this case that the insureds did opt for the lower coverage amount. Therefore, the holding in Espinoza-Solis compels the conclusion in this case that the liability limits are $250,000 per person and $500,000 per accident.”
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
