Muzafer Isovska v. Fitzpatrick, No. 368902, Mich. Ct. App. (Oct. 30, 2025)
The Michigan Court of Appeals ruled that a no-fault policy exclusion that conflicts with the state’s statutory PIP coverage requirements (MCL 500.3114(1)) is invalid.
Muzafer Isovska was injured while driving a Ford Focus, but he held a no-fault policy from USA Underwriters that listed only a Toyota Yaris. The court emphasized that under Michigan’s No-Fault Act, insurers must provide personal protection insurance benefits to any statutorily eligible insured—regardless of whether the vehicle involved is named in the policy. Any exclusion attempting to deny coverage contrary to mandatory statutory language cannot stand.
This decision reinforces that courts will strike down policy exclusions that conflict with Michigan’s express PIP coverage mandates.
