A jogger on a bicycle/pedestrian path was injured when struck by a moped owned by a homeowners policy insured and operated by his minor son. Their insurer filed an action for declaratory judgment, seeking a determination that it had no defense or indemnification obligations with respect to a personal injury lawsuit brought by the injured man and his wife.

The trial court rendered an opinion that the moped was excluded from coverage and that the insurer had no duty to defend. On appeal, the appeal court reversed, concluding that the pertinent motor vehicle exclusion clause in the policy was ambiguous with respect to mopeds and that, accordingly, the policy provided coverage. The Michigan Supreme Court granted permission to the insurer for appeal of that decision.

The insureds argued that personal liability coverage under the policy was applicable because a moped is a "recreational motor vehicle." The court noted that term defined in the policy as ". . . .a golf cart or snowmobile or. . . .if not subject to motor vehicle registration, any other land motor vehicle designed for recreational use off public roads." For coverage to apply, the court found it essential that such a vehicle not be subject to registration.

The facts established that the moped was registered under the Michigan Motor Vehicle Code at the time of the accident. The Supreme Court concluded that the trial court was justified in stating that "Michigan law requires a moped to be registered if the operator plans to drive it on public roads, a circumstance in this case." The decision of the Court of Appeals was reversed and the judgment of the trial court in favor of the insurance company was reinstated.

(FARM BUREAU MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff, Counter- Defendant, Appellant v. STARK ET AL., Defendants, Counter-Plaintiffs, Appellees v. HELWIG ET UX., Intervening Defendants, Counter-Plaintiffs, Appellees. Michigan Supreme Court. Nos. 87254, 87255. April 29, 1991. CCH 1991-92 Fire and Casualty Cases, Paragraph 3159.)