May 2013 Case Notes & Comments

“No pleasure is comparable to the standing upon the vantage-ground of truth.” ~ Francis Bacon (1561-1626)

MONTHLY QUIZ: Insureds purchase several automobiles from a private individual and thereafter procure several automobile insurance policies from Insurer. While the policies are in force, law enforcement seizes Insureds' cars on the grounds that they previously had been stolen. Insureds did not steal the cars and were not aware that the vehicles were stolen at the time they were purchased. Following the seizure, Insureds make claims for comprehensive coverage on their policies. Insurer ultimately declines and files several declaratory suits. Did the Insureds suffer losses? If yes, are losses due to seizure by law enforcement officers covered? You be the judge. (Answer below)

 

HOMEOWNER / ASSOCIATION LAW: Homeowner purchases house and property adjacent to several lakes, which lakes are considered common areas, and becomes a member of Homeowners’ Association.  The only recorded restrictive covenants provided that "[n]o boat pier may extend more than two (2) feet into the waters of the lake." Under Association's bylaws, which were never recorded, "all members [we]re bound by the current ... [the] Association Rules." Association's Board also promulgated rules regulating various activities on the lakes, such as fishing, swimming, boating, camping, and guest usage. When Association amended its rules to prohibit the use of pontoon boats with more than two pontoons, Homeowner sued since he owned a boat with three pontoons. Citing Illinois precedent for the proposition that restrictions on the use of private property must be recorded and made a part of the chain of title in order to be enforced, Homeowner argued that Association could not limit his use of the lake. The Court ruled that because the Association had the responsibility of administering the common property for the common good of the members, the Association also had the implied power to make rules over the common property - even where the recorded covenants did not expressly grant the authority to regulate those common areas. Homeowner loses, Association wins. Ripsch v. Goose Lake Association, 2013 IL App (3d) 120319  (May 14, 2013)

 

CONSUMER FRAUD / ATTORNEYS FEES: Following trial on breach of contract and Illinois Consumer Fraud Act claims, Trial Court awarded Plaintiffs a $5,994.32 judgment. But Trial Court also entered judgment for attorney fees against Defendants in the amount of $32,306.25 and costs in the amount of $680.67, (i.e. roughly four times the amount sought in actual damages). Defendants appealed, arguing that the Trial Court abused its discretion in awarding Plaintiffs four times more in attorneys’ fees than the actual damages, and, that Plaintiffs' attorney did an "overzealous" amount of work was done to recover the $5,994.32. But, the Appellate Court affirmed that attorney fees were properly awarded by examining the eight factors to be considered in connection such awards. Defendant loses, Plaintiffs’ attorney wins. Clayton v. Planet Travel Holdings, 2013 IL App (4th) 120717 (May 9, 2013)

 

NO COVERAGE FOR KICKBACK SCHEME: Insured, a provider of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) services to patients, was sued by one of its competitors for allegedly violating section 2 of the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act (i.e. 815 ILCS 505/2 (West 2010)). Competitor alleged that Insured engaged in a kickback scheme with certain physicians or clinics, submitted false and deceptive billing records to patients and third-party payors and engaged in a predatory pricing scheme designed to price Competitor and others out of the MRI services market. Insured tendered the various complaints to Insurer. Insurer filed a declaratory judgment action. In affirming the trial court, the Appellate Court found no coverage since Insured's conduct, which was willful and intentional, did not constitute an “occurrence” under the policy. The Appellate Court also found that the complaint did not allege discrimination and therefore the personal and advertising injury coverage was not triggered. Insurance company wins, Insured loses. West American Ins. Co. v. Midwest Open MRI, Inc., 2013 WL 1641408 (Apr.16, 2013)

 

ANSWER TO QUIZ: The Insureds lose. Comprehensive coverage was not available since the law enforcement seizure did not constitute a "direct, sudden and accidental damage to....a covered vehicle" because any damage was to the Insureds rather than to their vehicles.  That is, while Insureds suffered losses due to the seizure of their cars, the cars themselves did not sustain any damage. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Rodriguez, 2013 IL App (1st) 121388 (Mar. 28, 2013)

Past Publications

2024

March 2024
January 2024

2023

December 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
May 2023
March 2023
February 2023

2022

December 2022
October 2022
August 2022
July 2022
April 2022
March 2022
January 2022

2021

December 2021
October 2021
August 2021
July 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
January 2021

2020

December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
February 2020
January 2020

2019

December 2019
October 2019
September 2019
July 2019
May 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019

2018

December 2018
October 2018
August 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018

2017

December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
March 2017
February 2017

2016

December 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
March 2016
January 2016

2015

December 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015

2014

December 2014
October 2014
September 2014
July 2014
June 2014
April 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014

2013

December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
January 2013

2012

December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012

2011

December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011

2010

December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010

2009

December 2009