Legal Opinion · Dissent

McMillan v. AUTO CLUB INS ASS'N

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided May 16, 1994No. Docket 148573Published

1DissentM. J. Talbot, J.

I must dissent.

The plaintiffs insurance policy contained the following provision under the heading "Authorization for Excluded Driver”:

warning — When a named excluded person operates a vehicle all liability coverage is void — no one is insured. Owners of the vehicle and others legally responsible for the acts of the named excluded person remain fully personally liable.

MCL 500.3009(2); MSA 24.13009(2) authorizes use of a named-driver exclusion:

If authorized by the insured, automobile liability or motor vehicle liability coverage may be excluded when a vehicle is operated by a named person.

This…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Raska v. Farm Bureau Mutual InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Powers v. Detroit Automobile Inter-Insurance ExchangeMichigan Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Westway Trading Corp. v. River Terminal Corp.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1982
  4. Clevenger v. Allstate InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1993
  5. Verbison v. Auto Club Ins. Ass'nMichigan Court of Appeals · 1993

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API