Ultrablog416

LEVIN, J.

Before the enactment of 1980 PA 445, § 3114 of the no-fault automobile liability act1 provided that '[w]hen personal protection insurance benefits are payable to or for the benefit of an injured person under his own policy and would also be payable under the policy of his spouse, relative, or relative's spouse, the injured person's insurer shall pay all of the benefits and shall not be entitled to recoupment from the other insurer.' (Emphasis added.)

• Search and apply for the latest Start jobs in La Motte, IA. Verified employers. Competitive salary. Full-time, temporary, and part-time jobs. Job email alerts. Free, fast and easy way find a job of 723.000+ postings in La Motte, IA and other big cities in USA.
• LaMotte Company. 802 Washington Avenue PO Box 329 Chestertown, Maryland 21620 USA. 800-344-3100 410-778-3100 Fax: 410-778-6394.
• CH–EU-YJCh-A – Lamotte Beuvron (FRA) 25- Deadlines: Nominated entries date: TBC Definite entries date: TBC Classes: Category Age Horse/Pony Children 12-14 year old Single Pony Junior 14-18 year old Single Pony/ Pony Pairs Young Drivers 16-21 year old Single Pony/ Single Horse/ Pony Pairs.

Search and apply for the latest Class a cdl truck driver jobs in La Motte, IA. Verified employers. Competitive salary. Full-time, temporary, and part-time jobs. Job email alerts. Free, fast and easy way find a job of 811.000+ postings in La Motte, IA and other big cities in USA. System Requirements Software Requirements. Supported operating Systems: Windows® 10, Windows® 8.1, Windows® 7 SP1; Hardware Requirements. Minimum: 2.0 ghz or faster (avoid Intel® Atom and AMD® E-Series processors).

Act 445 added 'or personal injury benefits described in section 3103(2)' between 'personal protection insurance benefits' and 'are payable.' The Court of Appeals held that as a result of the amendment, an injured person's insurer, who, prior to the amendment, was primary and could not obtain recoupment from the insurer of the injured person's spouse, relative, or relative's spouse, was placed in the same level of priority as the insurer of the spouse, relative, or relative's spouse, and was 'entitled to recoupment from the other insurer.'2 We reverse.

I

Plaintiff's decedent, William LaMotte, a truck driver, owned a Kenworth tractor. The tractor was leased to T & T Trucking and trip-leased to Distribution Carriers, Inc., when LaMotte died in a single-vehicle accident while driving the rig through North Carolina in March, 1985.

LaMotte had no-fault insurance for the truck with Millers National Insurance Company. DCI was insured by Forum Insurance Company.

LaMotte was also deemed, by § 3114 of the no-fault act,3 to be insured under a policy issued by State Farm Automobile Insurance Company to his wife, Roberta LaMotte, and also under a policy issued by Auto Club Insurance Association to his wife's mother, who resided in the LaMotte household.

This action was commenced against Millers National and Forum Insurance Company, seeking survivor's loss4 personal protection insurance benefits. Forum Insurance was dismissed with prejudice. Millers National settled with the plaintiff, Roberta LaMotte, for $30,000, and then filed a third-party complaint against State Farm and Auto Club, seeking recoupment.5

II

Section 3114(1), before amendment in 1980, read as set forth in the margin.6 The 1980 amendment added the italicized words in the current version of § 3114(1) set forth in the margin.7

The Court of Appeals observed that the first sentence of § 3114(1) remained essentially unchanged, and that the second sentence is 'new and applies only to motorcycle policies.'8 It is the Court of Appeals interpretation of the third sentence with which we disagree. The Court of Appeals read the amendment as providing that the insurer of the injured person was primary 'now only to motorcycle policies.'9

Lamotte Driver Ed

The legislative history of Act 445 indicates that the Legislature intended no change except to include motorcycles in the priority scheme set forth in § 3114(1). The House Legislative Analyses indicate that the Legislature's purpose was to add motorcycles to the 'insurance priority scheme' already established by § 3114(1).10

We are persuaded that 'described in section 3103(2)' modifies only 'personal injury benefits' and not personal protection insurance benefits.

III

Personal protection insurance benefits, often described as 'PIP' benefits, are payable in respect to a '[m]otor vehicle accident,' which by definition 'means a loss involving the ownership, operation, maintenance, or use of a motor vehicle as a motor vehicle....'11 'Motor vehicle' is defined for this purpose as not including a motorcycle.12 Survivor's loss benefits are among the personal protection insurance benefits payable where there is a motor vehicle accident 'regardless of whether the accident also involves the ownership, operation, maintenance, or use of a motorcycle as a motorcycle.'13

Lamotte Driver Wanted

Act 445 elaborated on the insurance previously required of the owner or registrant of a motorcycle. In all events, § 3103, as amended by Act 445, only requires the owner or registrant of a motorcycle to provide 'personal injury benefits' for the benefit of third persons, and does not provide for personal protection insurance benefits in respect to a motorcycle accident that, by definition, 'means a loss involving the ownership, operation, maintenance, or use of a motorcycle as a motorcycle, but not involving the ownership, operation, maintenance, or use of a motor vehicle as a motor vehicle.'14

IV

We conclude that the Legislature intended no change in the priority scheme set forth in § 3114(1), except to include the insurers of motorcycles who provide personal injury benefits described in § 3103(2).

Lamotte Driver Updater

Reversed.

Lamotte Driver Test

CAVANAGH, C.J., and BRICKLEY, BOYLE, RILEY, GRIFFIN, and MALLETT, JJ., concurred with LEVIN, J.