|
No. 127871
| Robert Thomas Crouchman and |
|
|
Susan M. Crouchman, his wife |
|
|
Plaintiffs |
|
|
vs (Wayne - Giovan, W.) |
|
|
| Motor City Electric Company, |
|
|
| a Michigan Corporation, and |
|
|
| Citizens Insurance Company of |
|
|
| America, a Michigan corporation, |
|
|
Defendants, |
|
|
| and |
|
|
| Kevin James Wieczorek, |
|
Antonia F. Grinnan |
Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellee, |
|
Hal O. Carroll |
v |
|
|
| Auto-Owners Insurance Company, correctly |
|
John A. Yeager |
| identified as Home-Owners Insurance Company, |
|
|
Third-Party Defendant-Appellant. |
|
|
| ______________________________________ |
|
|
Click to view briefs in Adobe format:
Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellee's Brief in Opposition>>
Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellee's Supplemental Brief>>
Third-Party Defendant-Appellant's Application for Leave to Appeal>>
Third-Party Defendant-Appellant's Supplemental Brief>>
Background
Kevin Wieczorek was driving his employer's vehicle -- with his employer's permission and in the regular course of business -- when he rear-ended another vehicle. The other driver sued Wieczorek and his employer, but the employer's insurer became insolvent. Wieczorek then sued his no-fault insurance provider, Auto-Owners Insurance Company, seeking coverage. A provision in the no-fault policy stated that coverage applied when the insured was driving a "nonowned" automobile. The policy stated that liability coverage was extended to an automobile that is "not owned by or furnished or available for regular use to you or anyone living with you ...." The policy further stated that "We do not cover: 1) the owner of the automobile (that is not a trailer). 2) an automobile used in your business or occupation or that of a relative, unless it is: a) a private passenger automobile and b) used by you ...." Both Wieczorek and Auto-Owners moved for summary disposition, with Auto-Owners asking the court to dismiss the case. But the trial court agreed with Wieczorek that the policy covered the accident because Wieczorek was not the vehicle's owner, the vehicle was a "private passenger automobile," and Wieczorek was using it at the time of the accident. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial judge's ruling in an unpublished per curiam opinion, holding that the policy provided coverage because Wieczorek did not own the automobile involved in the accident. Auto-Owners appeals.
Top of Page
|
