Defendant argues that the classic definitions of motorcycle and dispositive Michigan case law compel the conclusion that plaintiff's motorcycle was a motor vehicle for purposes of this exclusion. An insurance policy is much the same as any other contract. It is an agreement between the parties in which a court will determine what the agreement was and effectuate the intent of the parties. The terms of an insurance policy are given their commonly used meanings, in context, unless clearly defined in the policy. An insurance contract is ambiguous if, after reading the entire contract, its language can be reasonably understood in differing ways.
Ambiguities are to be construed against the insurer, who is the drafter of the contract.
Further, exclusionary clauses are to be strictly construed in favor of the insured. Auto-Owners v Churchman, supra at 567. If an insurance contract sets forth definitions, the policy language must be interpreted according to those definitions. In support of its contention, defendant cites Bianchi, supra . In Bianchi, the plaintiff was injured when he collided with an uninsured automobile while riding his wife's motorcycle.