Can Uninsured Motorcyclist Sue for Injury?

The Motorcycle Legal Minute™ was created by Jason Waechter, THE Motorcycle Lawyer, to explain Michigan’s motorcycle law in a short and easy to understand way.

 

If you are the owner and operator of an uninsured motorcycle and you are in a wreck, can you still have a case? Well, the answer is yes and no.

 

An uninsured motorcyclist is barred from receiving No-Fault benefits. It is kind of a punishment for breaking the law that requires you to have it. Therefore, even if a drunk driver rear ends you, you cannot obtain No-Fault benefits from any insurance company.

 

That means you will not obtain up to 3 years of wage loss, up to 3 years of household chore payment, medical mileage and PIP Medical bill payment.

 

But Wait! There's more...

 

However, an uninsured motorcyclist, unlike an uninsured car driver, may still pursue a pain-and-suffering case against the negligent driver. Stated another way, a biker with no insurance can still receive compensation for his injuries.  

 

This is unbelievable because most nuances in the Michigan No-Fault that treat car operators differently than motorcyclists, it is usually the motorcyclist that gets shafted. This is literally the only situation where the biker’s outcome is better than the car operator’s.

 

Our Firm Made Great Law for Michigan Motorcyclists!

 

I am proud to say that my law firm actually made this law! There existed a gray area as to whether an uninsured motorcyclist is also barred from personal injury proceeds since car drivers are. We filed a lawsuit for a motorcycle client that was uninsured. The trial court judge dismissed the case pointing to the law that basically said uninsured motor vehicle owners are barred from recovering injury proceeds.  

 

My office appealed, and the Michigan Court of Appeals sided with us. Therefore, the gray area was filled in with specific law (case law). Because of our case, now the law is clear: an uninsured motorcyclist has the right to collect personal injury damages. The injury threshold must still be met, along with other legal requirements, but they now can’t dismiss a case just for being uninsured.  

 

Our case is called Brickey vs. McCarver, and can be found on the Michigan Court of Appeals website.  Here is an excerpt:

 

In this unanimous published opinion.. the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s grant of summary disposition for Defendants… because it found that the plain language of MCL 500.3135(2)(c) applied to motor vehicles and a motorcycle was not a motor vehicle.

 

MCL 500.3135(2)(c)

(2) For a cause of action for damages pursuant to subsection (1) filed on or after July 26, 1996, all of the following apply:

. . .

(c) Damages shall not be assessed in favor of a party who was operating his or her own vehicle at the time the injury occurred and did not have in effect for that motor vehicle the security required by section 3101 at the time the injury occurred.

MCL 500.3101(2)(i)(i)

[The definition of a motor vehicle] does not include any of the following:

(i) A motorcycle.

 

The Court of Appeals found that the plain language of MCL 500.3135(2)(c) only applied to motor vehicles and a motorcycle was not a motor vehicle. The Court first looked to the language of MCL 500.3135(2)(c) and determined that the section was only applicable to motor vehicles. The Court then cross-referenced the term motor vehicle with the definition of a motor vehicle provided in the No-Fault Act. Under MCL 500.3101(2)(i)(i) the No-Fault Act excluded motorcycles from the definition of motor vehicles. The Court then reasoned that since MCL 500.3135(2)(c) only referenced motor vehicles and motor vehicles did not include motorcycles, the subsection did not apply to a motorcycle because a motorcycle was not a motor vehicle for purposes of the Act.

 

See our FREE eBooks for more information about Michigan motorcycle law: