Legal Opinion

Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance v. Nikkel

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 20, 1999No. 111341, Calendar No. 16PublishedCited by 138 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCorrigan, J.

We granted leave in this case to determine whether a nonowned automobile clause1 of a no-fault insurance policy is ambiguous. We hold that the policy language at issue here is unambiguous and enforceable. In doing so, we repudiate the two-justice plurality opinion in Powers v DAIIE, 427 Mich 602; 398 NW2d 411 (1986), upon which the Court of Appeals relied. Under the clear language of the no-fault policy involved in this case, the policy does not cover vehicles furnished for regular use of either the named insured or any relative, unless the vehicle qualifies as a “temporary substitute…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Raska v. Farm Bureau Mutual InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Auto-Owners Insurance v. ChurchmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Cardinal Mooney High School v. Michigan High School Athletic Ass'nMichigan Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Port Huron Education Ass'n v. Port Huron Area School DistrictMichigan Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Heniser v. Frankenmuth Mutual InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1995

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

3Cited by138 opinions

  1. Klapp v. United Insurance Group Agency, IncMichigan Supreme Court · 2003
  2. Wilkie v. Auto-Owners InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Quality Products and Concepts Co. v. Nagel Precision, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 2003
  4. Western World Insurance Co. v. Mary ArmbrusterCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2014
  5. City of Grosse Pointe Park v. Michigan Municipal Liability & Property PoolMichigan Supreme Court · 2005

133 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