Insurance Law

Progressive Premier Insurance Company of Illinois v. Emiljanowicz

Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Insurance
Citation
Case Number: 
2013 IL App (1st) 113664
Decision Date: 
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 2d Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
HARRIS
Court properly granted summary judgment for insurer of freightliner driver, sued for car accident , finding that freight company's policy provided coverage for underlying claims for loss of consortium claim of plaintiff's husband. Company had exclusive possession, control, responsibility and use of freightliner at time of accident, even though at time of accident driver was en route to pick up a friend so he could drop off his freightliner inspected by a mechanic, as company instructed him. (QUINN and CONNORS, concurring.)

House Bill 2327

Topic: 
Filing fee increase
(Riley, D-Hazel Crest; Hutchinson, D-Chicago Heights) authorizes county boards to increase the court automation fee and the court document fee from $15 to $25. These fees are currently being paid by civil litigants and convicted defendants.The ceiling for defendants will be $15 for the court automation fee. Passed the House and awaiting a Senate Revenue Committee vote in the Senate.

Senate Bill 1912

Topic: 
Tort cases and settlement
(Raoul, D-Chicago) amends the Code of Civil Procedure create an enforcement mechanism for cases that settle but the defendant won’t comply with the settlement. It is limited to cases seeking money damages involving personal injury, wrongful death, or tort action. It requires a settling defendant pay all sums due to the plaintiff within 21 days of tender of all applicable documents required under this new Section. The procedure is as follows: (1) Requires a “settling defendant” to tender a release to the plaintiff within 14 days of written confirmation of the settlement. If the law requires court approval of a settlement, the plaintiff must tender to the defendant a copy of the court order approving the settlement. (2) If there is a known third-party right of recovery or subrogation interest, the plaintiff may protect the third-party’s right of recovery or subrogation interest by tendering to the defendant: (a) A signed release of the attorney’s lien. (b) Any of the following: (i) a signed release of a healthcare-provider lien; (ii) a letter from the plaintiff’s attorney agreeing to hold the full amount of the claimed lien in his or her client-fund account pending final resolution of the lien amount; or (iii) an offer that the defendant hold the full amount of the claimed right of recovery pending final resolution of the amount of the right of recovery. (c) Any of the following: (i) documentation of the agreement between the plaintiff and Medicare, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services, or the private health insurance company as to the amount of the settlement that will be accepted in satisfaction of right of recovery; (ii) a letter from the plaintiff’s attorney agreeing to hold the full amount of the claimed right to recovery in his or her client-fund account pending final resolution of the amount of the right to recovery; or (iii) an offer that the defendant hold the full amount of the claimed right to recovery pending final resolution of the amount of the right of recovery. (3) If the applicable court finds after a hearing that timely payment has not been made under this Section, judgment must be entered against that defendant for the amount in the executed release, costs incurred in obtaining the judgment, and 9% interest from the date of the plaintiff’s tender. (4) Senate Bill 1912 exempts units of local government, the State of Illinois, and state employees. Parties may agree to some other procedure if they wish. It passed the Senate yesterday and is in the House.

Phillips v. The Prudential Ins. Co. of America

Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Insurance
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 11-3870
Decision Date: 
May 6, 2013
Federal District: 
S.D. Ill.
Holding: 
Affirmed
Dist. Ct. did not err in dismissing for failure to state cause of action plaintiff’s class action alleging that defendant-insurance company’s default payment method and enrollment of plaintiff in defendant’s Alliance Account when paying her claim breached insurance policy and unreasonably delayed payment of insurance benefits in violation of section 155 of Ill. Insurance Code. Terms of policy gave option to plaintiff to chose among several payment options, and plaintiff’s failure to select any payment method triggered defendant’s preferred method of setting up Alliance Account, which gave plaintiff option to withdraw any amount of policy proceeds at any time. Moreover, terms of policy did not guarantee that it would pay beneficiary lump sum of policy's proceeds to exclusion of any other option. Plaintiff’s claim for vexatious delay was properly dismissed where plaintiff failed to allege that defendant had taken excessive amount of time to set up her Alliance Account.

Grinnell Mutual Reinsurance Company v. Hubbs

Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Insurance
Citation
Case Number: 
2013 IL App (3d) 110861
Decision Date: 
Wednesday, April 24, 2013
District: 
3d Dist.
Division/County: 
Henry Co.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
HOLDRIDGE
Policy exclusion is clear and unambiguous, excluding coverage for damages from divergence or obstruction or streams or surface water or property damage from interference with natural drainage to or from others' land. Court did not err in assigning some weight to testimony of two witnesses in ruling on insurer's summary judgment motion. Insurer may either seek a declaratory judgment or defend suit against its insured under reservation of rights. (WRIGHT and LYTTON, concurring.)

Delatorre v. Safeway Insurance Company

Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Duty to Defend
Citation
Case Number: 
2013 IL App (1st) 120852
Decision Date: 
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 3d Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed and remanded.
Justice: 
HYMAN
Passenger in vehicle of insured was injured in accident, In 1991. Passenger sued driver, whose insurer agreed to defend him under reservation of rights. Insurer breached its duty to defend, as it had nominal, passive, and one-way communication with attorney ostensibly retained to defend insured, and default judgment in excess of policy limits was entered. Entry of default judgment in PI case directly flows from insurer's breach of contract.Insured, who did not learn of default until years later, should not be subjected to judgment as insurer caused judgment to be entered. (NEVILLE, concurring; STERBA, concurring in part and dissenting in part.)

Senate Bill 1912

Topic: 
Claim for money damages
(Raoul, D-Chicago) makes several changes to the settlement of a claim for money damages. (1) Requires the settling defendant to tender a release within 14 days of the settlement. (2) If court approval of the settlement is required, it requires the plaintiff to timely tender to the settling defendant of a copy of the court order approving the settlement. (3) Requires the plaintiff to tender to settling defendant documentation about a known third-party lienholder or subrogation interest. (4) Requires a settling defendant to pay all sums due to the plaintiff within 21 days of tender of the executed release and lienholder documentation. (4) Awards interest under Section 2-1303 of the Code of Civil Procedure for failure to pay within 21 days from plaintiff’s tender of the executed release unless good cause is shown otherwise. (5) Senate Bill 1912 doesn’t apply to actions against the State, State employees, or anyone else who may be indemnified under the State Employee Indemnification Act. It is on third reading in the Senate.

West American Co. v. Midwest Open MRI, Inc.

Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Insurance
Citation
Case Number: 
2013 IL App (1st) 121034
Decision Date: 
Tuesday, April 16, 2013
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 2d Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
CONNORS
Court properly help that insurer owed its insured no duty to defend or indemnify in suit filed against insured by a competitor, alleging violations of Consumer Fraud Act. Complaint did not allege accidental conduct or consequences and thus did not allege an "occurrence" as defined by policy, and policy excluded coverage for acts done intentionally by or at direction of insured. Where insurer has no duty to defend because no coverage or potential for coverage under the policy, estoppel doctrine does not apply. (HARRIS and QUINN, concurring.)

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Rodriguez

Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Insurance
Citation
Case Number: 
2013 IL App (1st) 121388
Decision Date: 
Thursday, March 28, 2013
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 4th Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
EPSTEIN
Court properly entered summary judgment for insurer in declaratory judgment actions, ruling that policy provides no comprehensive coverage for vehicles which were, during policy period, seized by law enforcement authorities as stolen vehicles. Seizure of Defendants' stolen vehicles did not constitute "damage to" the vehicles and thus was not a "loss" for purposes of comprehensive coverage under policies. (FITZGERALD SMITH, concurring; PUCINSKI, specially concurring.)

Guzman v. 7513 West Madison Street, Inc.

Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Insurance
Citation
Case Number: 
2013 IL App (1st) 122161
Decision Date: 
Friday, March 29, 2013
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 5th Div.
Holding: 
Certified question answered; remanded.
Justice: 
HOWSE
(Court opinion corrected 4/11/13.) Where dram shop is being defended by Illinois Insurance Guaranty Fund after insurer is declared insolvent and Plaintiffs have recovered from UIM, from Defendant's auto insurer, and/or group health insurer, and verdict in excess of Defendant's maximum under Dram Shop Act, the reduction for "other insurance" recoveries per Section 546(a) of Illinois Insurance Guaranty Fund Act is applied against maximum dram shop liability to each Plaintiff. (McBRIDE and PALMER, concurring.)