Illinois Supreme Court Civil Issues Pending: Insurance

[UPDATED THROUGH May 13, 2014]

Illinois State Bar Association Mutual Insurance Co. v. Law Office of Tuzzolino & Terpinas

Supreme Court Case Number: 117096

Appellate Court: First District, Division Six

Appellate Court Case Number: 1-12-2660

Issue Presented: Does the innocent insured doctrine apply to alleged misrepresentations by another insured on a renewal application?

Detailed summary of facts and lower court opinions

 

 

Skaperdas v. Country Casualty Insurance Company

Supreme Court Case Number: 117021

Appellate Court: Fourth District

Appellate Court Case Number: 4-12-0986

Issue Presented: Does an insurance agent owe customers a duty of care in obtaining insurance?

Detailed summary of facts and lower court opinions

 

 

Steadfast Insurance Co. v. Caremark RX, Inc.

Supreme Court Case Number: 104906

Appellate Court: First District, Division 2

Appellate Court Case Number: 1-06-1221

Issues Presented: (1) Where an insurer pays its insured's defense costs solely in order to comply with a trial court order, may the insurer seek reimbursement of those payments when the order finding a duty to defend is reversed?  (2) Did the Circuit Court abuse its discretion by permitting the insurer to amend its complaint for declaratory judgment after the order on duty to defend is reversed to state a claim for unjust enrichment?

Appellate Court Opinion Summary: The insurer's insured was sued for allegedly conspiring to obtain undisclosed discounts, rebates and kickbacks for favoring certain drugs.  Insurer denied a defense and filed a declaratory judgment action.  The Circuit Court granted the insured's motion for summary judgment, ordered insurer to provide a defense, and refused to stay enforcement of its order pending review.  The Appellate Court reversed, holding that insurer had no duty to defend.  On remand, insurer filed a motion for restitution, seeking to recover defense costs expended between entry of the trial court's order and reversal.  The Circuit Court held that the insurer's declaratory judgment action was the "functional equivalent" of a defense on reservation of rights, and the insurer was therefore barred from recovering defense costs under General Agents Ins. Co. of Am. v. Midwest Sporting Goods Co., 215 Ill.2d 146 (2005).  The Appellate Court affirmed the Circuit Court's denial of the motion for restitution, finding that although the motion was not governed by General Agents, insurer had not stated any cause of action which could support a remedy of restitution.  However, the Appellate Court reversed the Circuit Court's refusal to permit the insurer to amend to state a claim for unjust enrichment.

Citations to Opinion: 373 Ill.App.3d 895, 311 Ill.Dec. 897, 869 N.E.2d 910

Tags:
Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
http://www.appellatestrategist.com/admin/trackback/193659
Comments (0) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end
Post A Comment / Question Use this form to add a comment to this entry.







Remember personal info?