policy, any loss payable under Coverage A or B will be paid to the mortgagee and you, as interests appear. If more than one mortgagee is named, the order of payment will be the same as the order of precedence of the mortgages. Plaintiff was clearly identified as “contract holder” on the declaration page of the policy. Under the “Mortgage Clause,” plaintiff, as “contract holder” standing in a substantially similar position as a mortgagee, is entitled Ins Ass’n, 111 Mich App 393, 397; 314 NW2d 635 (1981) (determining that the policy’s standard mortgage clause provided coverage for the mortgagee’s interest in the insured property even when the mortgagee acquired fee title to the property); Federal Nat’l Mortgage Ass’n v Ohio Casualty Ins Co, 46 Mich App 587, 589-590; 208 NW2d 573 (1973) (<HOLDING>); Davis v Michigan Basic Property Ins Ass’n,
holding that where the policy names only the directors or officers as insured the proceeds are not property of the estate holding that an ownedproperty exclusion did not apply with respect to property that the insured bought only after the policy periods for which the insured sought coverage holding that erisa benefits are not property of the estate holding that in contrast to foreclosure of a mortgage secured by personal property foreclosure of real property under a deed of trust need hot be at a commercially reasonable sale and the failure to conduct a commercially reasonable foreclosure sale of real property is not actionable holding that the mortgagees foreclosure on the insured property did not extinguish its right to recover benefits under the policy covering the property