Illinois Farmers Ins. Co. v. Cisco
| Decision Date | 11 September 1997 |
| Docket Number | 81048,Nos. 80980,s. 80980 |
| Citation | 687 N.E.2d 807,178 Ill.2d 386,227 Ill.Dec. 325 |
| Parties | , 227 Ill.Dec. 325 ILLINOIS FARMERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Gloria CISCO, Appellee. Charles SHANE, Appellee, v. ILLINOIS FARMERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
Kevin J. O'Shea, Serpico, Novelle & Navigato, Ltd., Chicago, for Gloria Cisco.
Danny L. Worker, Worker & Power, Chicago, for Illinois Farmers Insurance in No. 81048.
Charles R. Winkler, Winkler & Gorey, Ltd., North Riverside, for Charles Shane.
In these consolidated cases, Richard Cisco and Charles Shane were involved in separate motor vehicle accidents with uninsured motorists. Cisco and Shane were driving vehicles owned by their respective employers. The vehicles being driven by Cisco and Shane were insured by their employers under policies of motor vehicle insurance providing uninsured-motorist benefits in the amounts of $20,000 per person and $40,000 per occurrence, the minimums required under section 143a of the Illinois Insurance Code (Ill.Rev.Stat.1989, ch. 73, par. 755a) and section 7-203 of the Illinois Vehicle Code (Ill.Rev.Stat.1989, ch. 95 1/2, par. 7-203). Cisco's estate and Shane sought to collect additional uninsured-motorist benefits under automobile insurance policies issued to them on their personal vehicles by Illinois Farmers Insurance Company. In both cases, Illinois Farmers denied coverage based on an uninsured-motorist coverage exclusion.
The appellate court, in each case, found that Illinois Farmers' exclusionary language violated section 143a-2(1) of the Insurance Code (Ill.Rev.Stat.1989, ch. 73, par. 755a-2(1)). Section 143a-2(1) provides:
"No policy insuring against loss resulting from liability imposed by law for bodily injury or death suffered by any person arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of a motor vehicle shall be renewed or delivered or issued for delivery in this State with respect to any motor vehicle designed for use on public highways and required to be registered in this State unless uninsured motorist coverage as required in Section 143a of this Code is offered in an amount up to the insured's bodily injury liability limits." Ill.Rev.Stat.1989, ch. 73, par. 755a-2(1).
In Cisco's case, the appellate court affirmed the trial judge's ruling in favor of Cisco's estate. 278 Ill.App.3d 1022, 215 Ill.Dec. 838, 664 N.E.2d 235. In Shane's case, the appellate court reversed the trial judge's grant of summary judgment in favor of Illinois Farmers. No. 1-95-1870 (unpublished order under Supreme Court Rule 23). Thus, the appellate court's rulings allowed Cisco's estate and Shane to collect uninsured-motorist benefits under the policies issued by Illinois Farmers.
Illinois Farmers filed a petition for leave to appeal in each case. 155 Ill.2d R. 315(a).
[227 Ill.Dec. 327] We allowed both of Illinois Farmers' petitions and consolidated them for purposes of this appeal. We affirm the judgments of the appellate court.
In cause No. 80980, Richard Cisco was fatally injured in a motor vehicle accident involving an uninsured motorist. The vehicle driven by Cisco was owned by his employer and insured under a policy issued by the Insurance Company of North America (INA). The INA policy provided uninsured-motorist benefits of $20,000 per person and $40,000 per occurrence. INA paid Cisco's estate $20,000 in uninsured-motorist benefits as a result of Cisco's death.
At the time of the accident, Cisco and his wife, Gloria, were insured under automobile insurance policies issued by Illinois Farmers for the two vehicles owned by the Ciscos. Each policy provided bodily injury liability coverage and uninsured-motorist coverage in the amounts of $100,000 per person and $300,000 per occurrence. Gloria, on behalf of Richard's estate, sought uninsured-motorist benefits from Illinois Farmers under the policies. Illinois Farmers denied coverage based on paragraph 4 of the policies' "Other Insurance" provision. Each policy contains the following pertinent language:
"PART II-UNINSURED MOTORIST
Coverage C-Uninsured Motorist Coverage
(Including Underinsured Motorist Coverage)
We will pay all sums which an insured person is legally entitled to recover as damages from the owner or operator of an uninsured motor vehicle because of bodily injury sustained by the insured person. The bodily injury must be caused by accident and arise out of the ownership, maintenance or use of the uninsured motor vehicle.
* * *
Other Insurance
* * *
4. We will not provide insurance for a vehicle other than your insured car, unless the owner of that vehicle has no other insurance applicable to this part."
Illinois Farmers, as plaintiff, filed a declaratory judgment action in the circuit court of Cook County against defendant, Gloria Cisco, seeking a declaration of Illinois Farmers' rights and liabilities under the two automobile insurance policies. The parties filed cross-motions for judgment on the pleadings. The trial judge denied Illinois Farmers' motion and granted Gloria Cisco's motion. Illinois Farmers appealed.
The appellate court affirmed. 278 Ill.App.3d 1022, 215 Ill.Dec. 838, 664 N.E.2d 235. The appellate court explained that under section 143a-2(1) Illinois Farmers was required to offer the Ciscos uninsured-motorist benefits of $100,000 per person and $300,000 per occurrence because these were the limits of the Ciscos' bodily injury liability coverage. The Ciscos accepted the offer of uninsured-motorist benefits in excess of the minimums required by section 143a of the Insurance Code and section 7-203 of the Vehicle Code. Given the Ciscos' acceptance of this offer, the appellate court found that Illinois Farmers could not condition the availability of uninsured-motorist coverage under its policy on "the total lack of uninsured motorist coverage on the vehicle in which the insured [was] riding when injured." 278 Ill.App.3d at 1026, 215 Ill.Dec. 838, 664 N.E.2d 235.
The appellate court stated the Ciscos' case was distinguishable from the cases relied on by Illinois Farmers. Illinois Farmers relied on Vanek v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co., 268 Ill.App.3d 731, 205 Ill.Dec. 863, 644 N.E.2d 419 (1994), Shefner v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co., 243 Ill.App.3d 683, 183 Ill.Dec. 363, 611 N.E.2d 626 (1993), Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. v. Hecker, 183 Ill.App.3d 13, 131 Ill.Dec. 721, 538 N.E.2d 1277 (1989), and on remand and reconsideration, Luechtefeld v. Allstate Insurance Co., 167 Ill.2d 148, 212 Ill.Dec. 224, 656 N.E.2d 1058 (1995). In these cases, the insured in question owned multiple vehicles and obtained insurance coverage for the vehicles. In each case, at least one of the vehicles The courts in Luechtefeld, Vanek, Shefner, and Hecker found that the uninsured-motorist coverage under the policy purchased for the vehicle involved in the accident applied. Thus, the insured in question received the level of uninsured-motorist benefits selected for the particular vehicle the insured occupied when injured by an uninsured motorist. See Luechtefeld, 167 Ill.2d 148, 212 Ill.Dec. 224, 656 N.E.2d 1058; Vanek, 268 Ill.App.3d 731, 205 Ill.Dec. 863, 644 N.E.2d 419; Shefner, 243 Ill.App.3d 683, 183 Ill.Dec. 363, 611 N.E.2d 626; Hecker, 183 Ill.App.3d 13, 131 Ill.Dec. 721, 538 N.E.2d 1277. The appellate court found the Ciscos' case distinguishable. The appellate court stated that unlike the insureds in Luechtefeld, Vanek, Shefner, and Hecker, the Ciscos did not own the vehicle in which the injury occurred and did not choose the level of uninsured-motorist benefits for the vehicle in which the injury occurred. 278 Ill.App.3d at 1027-28, 215 Ill.Dec. 838, 664 N.E.2d 235.
[227 Ill.Dec. 328] owned by the insured had a lower level of uninsured-motorist benefits than did the insured's other vehicles. The insured was injured by an uninsured motorist while the insured was occupying one of the owned vehicles [178 Ill.2d 391] covered by a lower level of benefits. The insured in each case attempted to claim a higher level of benefits under one of the policies of insurance covering a vehicle not involved in the accident.
Illinois Farmers filed a petition for leave to appeal. 155 Ill.2d R. 315(a). We allowed Illinois Farmers' petition and consolidated it with cause No. 81048.
In cause No. 81048, Charles Shane was injured in a motor vehicle accident involving an uninsured motorist. The vehicle driven by Shane at the time of the accident was owned by his employer and insured under a policy issued to his employer by Casualty Insurance Company. The Casualty Insurance policy provided uninsured-motorist benefits of $20,000 per person and $40,000 per occurrence. As a result of the collision, Casualty Insurance paid Shane $20,000 in uninsured-motorist benefits.
At the time of the accident, Shane was insured under a personal automobile insurance policy issued by Illinois Farmers. The policy provided bodily injury liability coverage and uninsured-motorist coverage in the amounts of $100,000 per person and $300,000 per occurrence. Believing that his damages exceeded $20,000, Shane presented an uninsured-motorist claim to Illinois Farmers. Illinois Farmers denied coverage based on paragraph 4 of the policy's "Other Insurance" provision. (The relevant policy language is identical to that quoted above in reference to Cisco's case, cause No. 80980.)
Shane, as plaintiff, filed an action in the circuit court of Cook County against defendant, Illinois Farmers, seeking a declaration of coverage for uninsured-motorist benefits. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. The trial judge granted summary judgment in favor of Illinois Farmers.
The appellate court reversed. No. 1-95-1870 (unpublished order...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Jung
...v. Chicago Park District, 179 Ill.2d 500, 507, 228 Ill.Dec. 698, 689 N.E.2d 1119 (1997); Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. v. Cisco, 178 Ill.2d 386, 395, 227 Ill.Dec. 325, 687 N.E.2d 807 (1997); People v. Thomas, 116 Ill.2d at 304, 107 Ill.Dec. 690, 507 N.E.2d Because the State's contentions a......
-
Janes v. WESTERN STATES INS. CO.
...available to plaintiff. This would be void as against the purpose of filling the gap. See Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. v. Cisco, 178 Ill.2d 386, 394, 227 Ill.Dec. 325, 687 N.E.2d 807, 811 (1997) (an "other insurance" clause conditioning the policyholder's uninsured-motorist coverage on th......
-
State Farm Mut. Auto. v. Ill. Farmers Ins.
...policy terms are to be construed as written unless those terms violate public policy. Illinois Farmers Insurance Company v. Cisco, 178 Ill.2d 386, 392, 227 Ill.Dec. 325, 687 N.E.2d 807 (1997), citing Menke v. Country Mutual Insurance Co., 78 Ill.2d 420, 423, 36 Ill.Dec. 698, 401 N.E.2d 539 ......
-
State Farm Mut. v. Illinois Farmers Ins.
...insurance policy will be applied as written unless those terms are contrary to public policy. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. v. Cisco, 178 Ill.2d 386, 392, 227 Ill.Dec. 325, 687 N.E.2d 807 (1997); Menke v. Country Mutual Insurance Co., 78 Ill.2d 420, 423, 36 Ill.Dec. 698, 401 N.E.2d 539 (19......