THE INSURANCE CODE OF 1956
Act 218 of 1956
500.3103 Owner or registrant of motorcycle; security required; offering security for payment of first-party medical benefits; rates, deductibles, and provisions.
Sec. 3103.
(1) An owner or registrant of a motorcycle shall provide security against loss resulting from liability imposed by law for property damage, bodily injury, or death suffered by a person arising out of the ownership, maintenance, or use of that motorcycle. The security shall conform with the requirements of section 3009(1).
(2) Each insurer transacting insurance in this state which affords coverage for a motorcycle as described in subsection (1) also shall offer, to an owner or registrant of a motorcycle, security for the payment of first-party medical benefits only, in increments of $5,000.00, payable in the event the owner or registrant is involved in a motorcycle accident. An insurer providing first-party medical benefits may offer, at appropriate premium rates, deductibles, provisions for the coordination of these benefits, and provisions for the subtraction of other benefits provided or required to be provided under the laws of any state or the federal government, subject to the prior approval of the commissioner. These deductibles and provisions shall apply only to benefits payable to the person named in the policy, the spouse of the insured, and any relative of either domiciled in the same household.
History: Add. 1975, Act 329, Eff. Mar. 31, 1976 ;-- Am. 1977, Act 54, Imd. Eff. July 6, 1977 ;-- Am. 1980, Act 445, Eff. Jan. 15, 1981 ;-- Am. 1986, Act 173, Imd. Eff. July 7, 1986
Constitutionality Notes:
The legislative scheme which allows motorcyclists to receive no-fault benefits for personal injuries without requiring them to maintain no-fault security does not deny automobile drivers equal protection or due process of law. Underhill v Safeco Insurance Company, 407 Mich 175; 284 NW2d 463 (1979).
PopularName Notes:
Act 218
PopularName Notes:
Essential Insurance
PopularName Notes:
No-Fault Insurance
Notes of Decisions
Corwin v. DaimlerChrysler Ins., 819 N.W.2d 68 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 3× “A personal injury insurance policy described in [MCL 500.3103(2)] applies to accidental bodily injury to the person named in the policy, the person’s spouse, and a relative of either domiciled in the same household, if the injury arises from a motorcycle accident.”
Tracy C Brickey v. Vincent Lavon McCarver, 919 N.W.2d 412 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 3× “3103, and public policy dictates that any operator of a motorcycle -like any operator of a motor vehicle-who has failed to obtain insurance coverage as required by law should be barred from recovering tort damages. Indeed, § 3103 provides, in pertinent part, "(1) An owner or…”
Titan Ins. v. Am. Country Ins., 876 N.W.2d 853 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 2× “A personal injury insurance policy described in [MCL 500.3103(2)] applies to accidental bodily injury to the person named in the policy, the person’s spouse, and a relative of either domiciled in the same household, if the injury arises from a motorcycle accident.”
Malek Hmeidan v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 928 N.W.2d 258 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 2× “Under MCL 500.3103(2), motorcyclists must be offered "security for the payment of first-party medical benefits only, in increments of $ 5,000.”
Farmers Ins. Exch. v. Farm Bureau Gen. Ins., 724 N.W.2d 485 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006).
“1 The parties agreed at oral argument before us that Osentoski had the insurance required of him as a motorcycle owner or registrant pursuant to MCL 500.3103(1). 2 The plain language of both MCL 500.”
Keller v. Losinski, 285 N.W.2d 334 (Mich. Ct. App. 1979).
· cites it 2× “3115(1); MSA 24.13115(1). Motorcycles, being two-wheeled vehicles are expressly excluded from the mainstream of the no-fault act, MCL 500.”
Barnes v. Farmers Ins. Exch., 862 N.W.2d 681 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
“3113 provides that [a] person is not entitled to be paid personal protection insurance benefits for accidental bodily injury if at the time of the accident any of the following circumstances existed: (b) The person was the owner or registrant of a motor vehicle or motorcycle…”
Hill v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp., 525 N.W.2d 905 (Mich. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 2× “MCL 500.3103(h); MSA 24.13103(h) excludes lessors as described, supra, from the definition of registrant.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 500.3103(1) — 15 cases
Farmers Ins. Exch. v. Farm Bureau Gen. Ins., 724 N.W.2d 485 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006).
“1 The parties agreed at oral argument before us that Osentoski had the insurance required of him as a motorcycle owner or registrant pursuant to MCL 500.3103(1). 2 The plain language of both MCL 500.”
Tracy C Brickey v. Vincent Lavon McCarver, 919 N.W.2d 412 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018).
“3103, and public policy dictates that any operator of a motorcycle -like any operator of a motor vehicle-who has failed to obtain insurance coverage as required by law should be barred from recovering tort damages. Indeed, § 3103 provides, in pertinent part, "(1) An owner or…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 500.3103(2) — 8 cases
Corwin v. DaimlerChrysler Ins., 819 N.W.2d 68 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012).
“A personal injury insurance policy described in [MCL 500.3103(2)] applies to accidental bodily injury to the person named in the policy, the person’s spouse, and a relative of either domiciled in the same household, if the injury arises from a motorcycle accident.”
Titan Ins. v. Am. Country Ins., 876 N.W.2d 853 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
“A personal injury insurance policy described in [MCL 500.3103(2)] applies to accidental bodily injury to the person named in the policy, the person’s spouse, and a relative of either domiciled in the same household, if the injury arises from a motorcycle accident.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 500.3103(h) — 1 case
Hill v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp., 525 N.W.2d 905 (Mich. Ct. App. 1994).
“MCL 500.3103(h); MSA 24.13103(h) excludes lessors as described, supra, from the definition of registrant.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 500.3103(l)(i) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.