Miller v. St. Paul Mercury Ins. Co.

In action by plaintiffs seeking declaration that defendant-insurance company was required to indemnify insured corporation and two of its directors as defendants in underlying action by five individuals (some of whom were former directors of said corporation) alleging fraud, civil conspiracy and violation of Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Practices Act, Dist. Ct. erred in granting defendant's motion to dismiss after finding that defendant had no duty to defend or indemnify any part of underlying lawsuit based on "insured vs. insured" exclusion where three of five plaintiffs in underlying action, as former directors of corporation, were also "insureds" under applicable policy. While defendant was not required to defend or indemnify claims by insured plaintiffs, defendant must defend and indemnify non-insured plaintiffs based on allocation clause in policy.