Insurance Law

American Access Casualty Co. v. Tutson

American Access Casualty Co. v. Tutson
Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Insurance
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 1-09-2566
Decision Date: 
Friday, April 22, 2011
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 6th Div.
Holding: 
Reversed and remanded with directions.
Justice: 
CAHILL
Section 143.1 of Illinois Insurance Code tolls a contractual limitation provision when the insured supplied the insurer with information sufficient to constitute a proof of loss, and the insurer did not deny the claim within the two-year limitation period. (McBRIDE and R.E. GORDON, concurring.)

Keeley & Sons, Inc. v. Zurich American Insurance Company

Keeley & Sons, Inc. v. Zurich American Insurance Company
Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Insurance
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 5-10-0382
Decision Date: 
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
District: 
5th Dist.
Division/County: 
St. Clair Co.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
WEXSTTEN
Plaintiff corporation sued insurer to recover alleged overpayments of premiums under workers' compensation policies. Scope of arbitration clause in Rating Agreements did not reach the Plaintiff's causes of action, as pled in Complaint, to trigger the clause. Generic language in an arbitration clause does not necessarily mean that the scope of the arbitration clause reaches to disputes involving matters arising from other contracts, such as the insurance policies. (CHAPMAN and DONOVAN, concurring.)

Phoenix Insurance Company v. Rosen

Phoenix Insurance Company v. Rosen
Illinois Supreme Court
Civil Court
Arbitration
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 110679
Decision Date: 
Thursday, April 21, 2011
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co.
Holding: 
Appellate court reversed.
Justice: 
GARMAN
In area of uninsured motorist coverage, the legislature has required arbitration clauses, and allows smaller awards to be binding yet allows higher awards to be rejected. "Trial de novo" provision in underinsured motorist auto insurance policy, allowing either party to an insurance contract to demand a trial de novo after arbitration, was not unenforceable as unconscionable, and was not invalid as against public policy. (FREEMAN, THOMAS, KARMEIER, BURKE, and THEIS, concurring.)

First Chicago Insurance Company v. Molda

First Chicago Insurance Company v. Molda
Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Insurance
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 1-10-1138
Decision Date: 
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 6th Div.
Holding: 
Reversed.
Justice: 
R.E. GORDON
Insurer filed declaratory judgment action as to duty to defend or indemnify Defendant driver or his employer in litigation from car accident. Court improperly granted summary judgment for insurer in finding that insurer had not received timely notice of accident as required by his employer's policy. Employer's president and treasurer were aware of accident within two days of occurrence, and within that time discussed nature of accident with their insurance broker. Insurer received notice of claim eleven months after insurer was named in amended complaint filed by driver of other vehicle, which is not unreasonable notice. Issues of fact exist as to conversation between broker and employer, whether broker was acting as agent for insurer for purpose of receiving notice, and whether insurer was prejudiced by the delay. (GARCIA and McBRIDE, concurring.)

Rein v. State Farm Automobile Insurance Company

Rein v. State Farm Automobile Insurance Company
Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Arbitration
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 1-10-0764
Decision Date: 
Friday, March 4, 2011
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 6th Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
GARCIA
Plaintiff filed declaratory judgment action for uninsured motorist coverage after hit-and-run accident. Court properly held that action was barred by insurer's policy provision requiring arbitration or suit for uninsured motorist coverage to be commenced within two years after date of accident. Arbitration process is not commenced by insured sending letter stating intent to pursue arbitration, where letter did not expressly and unequivocally request arbitration or name an arbitrator on the insured's behalf within two years of accident as policy terms required. (McBRIDE and R.E. GORDON, concurring.)

Westfield Insurance Company v. FCL Builders

Westfield Insurance Company v. FCL Builders
Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Insurance
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 1-10-0521
Decision Date: 
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 2d Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
CONNORS
(Court opinion corrected 3/11/11.) General contractor (FCL) was hired to work on construction project, and subcontracted out steel fabrication and erection for project to Suburban Ironworks, which subcontracted out steel erection to JAK; employee of JAK was severely injured in fall from steel beam. Court properly granted summary judgment in favor of JAK's insurer, in finding that FCL was not an additional insured under the policy issued to JAK and was thus not obligated to defend or indemnify FCL in tort action filed by injured employee. Plain language of endorsement required that JAK and other entity must have agreed in writing that entity be added as additional insured, and no such written agreement existed between JAK and FCL. Certificate of insurance, which was not issued by insurer but by a third party, expressly confers no rights on certificate holder and expressly does not alter insurer's liability on policy. (KARNEZIS and HARRIS, concurring.)

CIMCO Communications v. National Fire Insurance Company of Hartford

CIMCO Communications v. National Fire Insurance Company of Hartford
Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Insurance
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 1-09-3035
Decision Date: 
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 2d Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
CONNORS
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.)

Kartman v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co.

Federal 7th Circuit Court
Kartman v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co.
Civil Court
Class Action
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 09-1725
Decision Date: 
February 14, 2011
Federal District: 
S.D. Ind., Indianapolis Div.
Holding: 
Reversed and remanded
Dist. Ct. erred in certifying class action for injunctive relief under Rule 23(b)(2) in action alleging that defendant-insurance company breached contractual obligation by consistently underpaying plaintiffs-policyholders who submitted claims for hail damage done to their roofs. While Dist. Ct. concluded that class claim for injunctive relief could proceed to determine whether defendant should be required to re-inspect plaintiffs' roofs pursuant to uniform and objective standard, instant case was not appropriate for class certification under Rule 23(b)(2) where plaintiffs' remedy in instant case was only for monetary damages, and where there was no contract or tort-based duty requiring defendant to use particular standard for assessing hail damage. Moreover, requested injunction as envisioned by plaintiffs was not final remedy for purposes of Rule 23(b)(2) since class-wide roof re-inspection would only lay evidentiary foundation for subsequent individual determinations of liability.

Golub and Associates v. State Farm

Golub and Associates v. State Farm
Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Liens
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 5-09-0454
Decision Date: 
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
District: 
5th Dist.
Division/County: 
St. Clair Co.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
GOLDENHERSH
Public insurance adjuster claimed a valid lien on homeowner's insurance proceeds, which lien was created by contract between adjuster and homeowner for fire loss adjusting services to be provided for 10% fee. That Chapter 770 does not specifically describe liens for public insurance adjusters does not mean that such liens cannot exist, as Chapter 770 is not meant to be comprehensive. (SPOMER and WEXSTTEN, concurring.)

United Automobile Insurance Company v. Wilson

United Automobile Insurance Company v. Wilson
Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Arbitration
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 1-09-3061
Decision Date: 
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
District: 
1st Dist.
Division/County: 
Cook Co., 2d Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed.
Justice: 
CONNORS
After arbitrator issued award in favor of Defendants, Plaintiff insurer filed declaratory judgment action asking court to find that Defendants' claim of damages from hit-and-run was not covered under their uninsured motorist coverage, and that the policy was void due to Defendants' alleged spoliation of evidence, as vehicle was junked before being inspected. Nothing in record indicates that the arbitrator exceeded his authority, and no basis exists to vacate the award from the binding arbitration; the court had ordered only that the award be stayed, rather than vacated, pending resolution of coverage issue. (CUNNINGHAM and KARNEZIS, concurring.)