Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices 

# Order

May 14, 2010

138869(70)

DETROIT MEDICAL CENTER, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 138869 COA: 283815 Wayne CC: 2007-700367-NF TITAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion for rec onsideration of this Court’s December 21, 2009 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does notappear that the order was entered erroneously.

M ARKMAN

, J. ( dissenting ).

I respectfully dissent from this Court’ s order denying defendant’s motion for reconsideration and instead would grant le ave to appeal in this case and in Spectrum v

Titan Ins , No. 140109. These cases both raise the significant question of when a spouse or live-in companion of a registered owner of an uninsured motor ve hicle will be deemed an “owner” of that vehicle, notwithstanding that their name is not on the title to the vehicle. MCL 500.3101(2)(h)(i), defines “own er” to include “a person renting a motor
vehicle or having the use thereof , under a lease or otherwise, for a period that is greater than 30 days.” (Emphasis added). Bein g deemed an “owner” carries significant consequences because MCL 500. 3113(b) bars an owner fro m no-fault benefits “for accidental bodily injury if at the time of the accident. . .[t]he pe rson was the owner or registrant of a motor vehicle or motorcycle in volved in the accident with respect to which the [insurance] required by [MCL 500.3101 or MCL 500.3103] was not in effect.”

In this case

, Maria Jimenez was injured while dr iving an uninsured vehicle titled
in the name of her live-in co mpanion, Jose Gonzales. She estimated that she had driven the van four times over the prev ious four months since the vehicle was purchased. In Spectrum, Kevin Zoerman was injured in a moto r vehicle accident while driving anI, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk May 14, 2010

d0511 2

uninsured vehicle titled in the name of his wife, Brandy Zoerman. Mr. Zoerman had
driven the vehicle an estimated 3-5 times over the previous 14 months.

Defendant argued in each case that no -fault coverage was pr ecluded because Mr.
Zoerman and Ms. Jimenez were each an “own er” pursuant to MCL 500.3101(2)(h)(i), i.e., they had “the use” of the vehicle for a pe riod greater than 30 days. The trial court and the Court of Appeals ruled to the cont rary, arguing that neither of these persons enjoyed “regular” or “exclusi ve” use of the vehicle.

I would grant leave to appeal to consid er defendant’s argument that the Court of Appeals has engrafted a “regular” or “exclu sive” use requirement onto the statutory definition of “owner,” and that such requirement is nowhere found in the statute. Rather, defendant argues, the focus must be upon whether a person had a “right to use” a vehicle. I would also grant leave generally to asse ss the circumstances under which a person may avoid an “owner” designation und er MCL 500.3101(2)(h)(i) by the expedient of titling an uninsured vehicle in the name of a family member living in the same household. The financial implications of the questions po sed in this case are considerable for all automobile policy holders in this state.

C ORRIGAN , J., joins the statement of M ARKMAN , J.