Ryerson Inc. v. Federal Ins. Co.

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant-insurance company's motion for summary judgment in action by plaintiff-insured seeking declaration that defendant's insurance policy covered $8.5 million settlement plaintiff was required to pay in underlying action alleging that plaintiff fraudulently concealed material facts to induce third-party to purchase one of plaintiff's subsidiaries. Underlying claim for restitution was not insurable interest that could be covered by any insurance contract since: (1) underlying action was attempt to obtain from insured profits from sale of subsidiary that did not belong to insured; and (2) any finding that defendant was liable to insured would improperly allow insured to keep profits associated with its alleged fraud in underlying sale of subsidiary. Fact that defendant asserted different rationale for denying coverage prior to insured filing instant lawsuit was not circumstance that would justify plaintiff's invocation of "mend the hold" doctrine so as to require different result.