Streit v. Metropolitan Casualty Ins. Co.

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting plaintiffs-insureds’ motion for summary judgment in action alleging that defendant-insurance company wrongfully withheld proceeds of insurance policy, where record showed that insureds’ 21-year old son intentionally set fire to plaintiffs’ home. While language in policy precluded plaintiffs from obtaining instant proceeds, said language was in conflict with Illinois Standard Fire Policy, which set minimum threshold for what fire-insurance policies must cover. Moreover, defendant failed to provide said minimum coverage, since: (1) defendant’s policy suspends for all insured parties coverage for intentional loss caused by any insured party; and (2) Standard Fire Policy suspends coverage only if hazard “increased by any means within control or knowledge of an insured.” As such, while son could not recover under Standard Fire Policy for his intentional acts, innocence co-insureds such as plaintiffs could still recover under Standard Fire Policy.