Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Insurance
Court properly interpreted business income provision of insurance policy as limiting recovery to only those losses sustained as a result of necessary suspension of operations, during the three-month period of restoration. Business income provision of policy would cover any losses during the three-month period of restoration following a flood, and extended provision would cover any additional losses for up to 30 days between end of period of restoration and resumption of business operations at preflood levels. As Plaintiffs can offer no competing reasonable interpretation, the business income provision is not ambiguous, and summary judgment for Defendant was proper. (CUNNINGHAM and HARRIS, concurring.)