Allstate Ins. Co. v. Detroit Auto. Inter-Ins. Exchange

• Court: Court of Appeal of Michigan
• Writing for the Court: PER CURIAM; It is not disputed that Joann Passage, the insured
• Citation: Allstate Ins. Co. v. Detroit Auto. Inter-Ins. Exchange, 251 N.W.2d 266, 73 Mich.App. 112 (Mich. App. 1976)
• Decision Date: 30 November 1976
• Docket Number: Docket No. 27536,INTER-INSURANCE
• Parties: ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Foreign Insurer, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DETROIT AUTOMOBILEEXCHANGE et al., Defendants-Appellees.

Page 266

251 N.W.2d 266

73 Mich.App. 112

ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Foreign Insurer, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DETROIT AUTOMOBILE INTER-INSURANCE EXCHANGE et al Defendants-Appellees.

Docket No. 27536.

Court of Appeals of Michigan.

Nov. 30, 1976.

Released for Publication March 18, 1977.

Garan, Lucow, Miller, Lehman, Seward & Cooper by David J. Cooper, Detroit, for plaintiff-appellant.

Booth, Patterson & Karlstrom by J. Timothy Patterson, Pontiac, for Theodore and Cynthia Jean Figurelle.

Rouse, Selby, Dickinson, Pike & Mourad by Michael B. Haber, Detroit, for Detroit Auto. Inter-Ins. Exchange.

Before WALSH, P. J., and R. B. BURNS and BIVINS, ^* JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff, Allstate Insurance Company, filed a declaratory action against the defendants seeking to void the exclusion of Charles Passage from coverage under an automobile liability policy issued to his wife, Joann Passage, by Detroit Automobile Inter-Insurance Exchange (DAIIE). The trial court granted summary judgment for the defendants, and Allstate appeals.

The validity of an exclusion of a named driver from coverage under an automobile liability policy is governed by M.C.L.A. § 500.3009(2); M.S.A. § 24.13009(2):

"(2) When authorized by the insured, automobile liability or motor vehicle liability coverage may be excluded when a vehicle is operated by a named person. Such exclusion shall not be valid unless the following notice is on the face of the policy or the declaration page or certificate of the policy and on the certificate of insurance referred to in . . . section 257.1104 of the Compiled Laws of 1948: 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."

It is not disputed that Joann Passage, the insured, authorized DAIIE to exclude Charles Passage from coverage. Nor is it contested that the prescribed statutory warning appeared on the face of the policy and on the certificate of insurance.

The plaintiff nevertheless contends that the exclusion was void because the certificate of insurance issued to Joann Passage did not list the name of Charles Passage as an excluded driver. Allstate argues that because DAIIE prints the required warning on all certificates of insurance, regardless of whether there is an excluded driver under the policy, the warning is meaningless unless accompanied by the name of the excluded driver. Therefore, the exclusion did not conform to the requirements of the statute and is invalid. We disagree.

There is no precedent for the instant question. The cases cited by the plaintiff are inapposite in that they involved policies issued prior to the enactment of M.C.L.A. § 500.3009(2); M.S.A. § 24.13009(2). Hence, that statute did not apply to them. Our decision, therefore, turns on the legislative intent in enacting the statute under consideration.

In our judgment, the only premise which could support plaintiff's argument is that the statutory warning is intended to give notice to the general public or to persons other than the insured. Our reading of the statutory language and review of the legislative history of the act lead us to a different conclusion.

First, by its express terms, the statute requires only that the prescribed warning appear on the certificate of insurance. Second, the nature of the warning itself indicates that it is intended to notify the insured of the consequences of allowing a named...