Progressive Premier Ins. Co. Of Ill. v. Kocher
| Decision Date | 13 July 2010 |
| Docket Number | No. 5-07-0468.,5-07-0468. |
| Parties | PROGRESSIVE PREMIER INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Luke KOCHER, a Minor, by and Through the Guardian ad litem, Jeffrey E. FLEMING, Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
402 Ill.App.3d 756
932 N.E.2d 1094
342 Ill.Dec. 633
PROGRESSIVE PREMIER INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Luke KOCHER, a Minor, by and Through the Guardian ad litem, Jeffrey E. FLEMING, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 5-07-0468.
Appellate Court of Illinois,Fifth District.
July 13, 2010.
Bill Porter, Reagan F. Goins, Chilton Yambert Porter & Young, Geneva, IL, for Appellant.
Jeffrey E. Fleming, Fleming Law Office, Olney, IL, for Appellee.
Justice CHAPMAN delivered the opinion of the court:
This appeal requires us to construe a limitation-of-liability provision in a vehicle insurance policy and to determine the effect of that provision where two of the three vehicles covered under the policy crashed into each other. The plaintiff, Progressive Premier Insurance Company of Illinois (Progressive), appeals an order
of the trial court finding in favor of the defendant, Luke Kocher, in a declaratory judgment action in which Progressive sought a ruling declaring that Luke's recovery was limited to the bodily injury liability limits for only one of the vehicles. We affirm.
This case involves an accident that occurred when Luke Kocher was riding as a passenger on an all-terrain vehicle (ATV) driven by his father, Timothy Kocher. Luke's brother, Nick Kocher, was driving a motorcycle. The motorcycle and the ATV collided. As a result, Luke suffered head injuries requiring five days of initial hospitalization and three surgeries.
At the time of the accident, both vehicles were covered under an insurance policy issued by Progressive to Timothy and Paula Kocher. The policy also covered a third vehicle, another motorcycle. Under a section entitled “Limits of Liability,” the policy provides as follows:
“The limit of liability shown on the Declarations Page is the most we will pay regardless of the number of:
1. claims made;
2. covered vehicles;
3. trailers shown on the Declarations Page;
4. insured persons;
5. lawsuits brought;
6. vehicles involved in an accident; or
7. premiums paid.”
The declarations page itself states, “The policy limits shown for a vehicle may not be combined with the limits for the same coverage on another vehicle.”
The policy limits appear on the declarations page in an “Outline of coverage,” which consists of four sections. The first section is titled “General policy coverage.” The other three sections pertain to each of the covered vehicles. Each section is laid out as a chart with four columns. The four columns are essentially the same in each section of the outline of coverage-they show, respectively, the types of coverage provided and the limits, deductibles, and premiums for each. The outline of coverage is laid out as follows:
+--------------------------------------------------+ ¦“General policy coverage¦Limits¦Deductible¦Premium¦ +--------------------------------------------------+
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist ¦$100,000 each person/$300,000 each ¦$15¦ ¦Bodily Injury ¦accident ¦ ¦ +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦Total general policy coverage ¦$15 ¦ ¦ ¦ +------------------------------------------+------+----------+-------¦ +------------------------------------------+------+----------+-------¦ ¦2002 Yamaha YFM660FWA ¦Limits¦Deductible¦Premium¦ +------------------------------------------+------+----------+-------¦ ¦Liability to Others (with guest passenger)¦$18 ¦ ¦ ¦ +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦Bodily Injury Liability¦$100,000 each person/$300,000 each accident¦ +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
+--------------------------------------------------+ ¦Property Damage Liability¦$50,000 each accident¦ ¦ +-------------------------+---------------------+--¦ ¦Medical Payments ¦$1,000 each person ¦6 ¦ +-------------------------+---------------------+--¦ ¦Comprehensive ¦$100 ¦17¦ +-------------------------+---------------------+--¦ ¦Collision ¦$250 ¦19¦ +--------------------------------------------------+
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦Custom Parts or Equipment¦$1,000 with Comprehensive or Collision¦included¦ +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+---------------------------------+ +-----------------------------+---¦ ¦Total premium for 2002 Yamaha¦$60¦ +-----------------------------+---¦ +---------------------------------+
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦1995 Yamaha (ALL MODEL) ¦Limits¦Deductible¦Premium¦ +------------------------------------------+------+----------+-------¦ ¦Liability to Others (with guest passenger)¦$54 ¦ ¦ ¦ +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦Bodily Injury Liability¦$100,000 each person/$300,000 each accident¦ +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
+-------------------------------------------------+ ¦Property Damage Liability¦$50,000 each accident¦ ¦ +-------------------------+---------------------+-¦ ¦Medical Payments ¦$1,000 each person ¦8¦ +-------------------------+---------------------+-¦ ¦Comprehensive ¦$100 ¦5¦ +-------------------------+---------------------+-¦ ¦Collision ¦$250 ¦8¦ +-------------------------------------------------+
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦Custom Parts or Equipment¦$1,000 with Comprehensive or Collision¦included¦ +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+ +------------------------------------------+------+----------+-------¦ ¦Total premium for 1995 Yamaha ¦$75 ¦ ¦ ¦ +------------------------------------------+------+----------+-------¦ +------------------------------------------+------+----------+-------¦ ¦2001 Honda TRX250EX ¦Limits¦Deductible¦Premium¦ +------------------------------------------+------+----------+-------¦ ¦Liability to Others (with guest passenger)¦$49 ¦ ¦ ¦ +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦Bodily Injury Liability¦$100,000 each person/$300,000 each accident¦ +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
+--------------------------------------------------+ ¦Property Damage Liability¦$50,000 each accident¦ ¦ +-------------------------+---------------------+--¦ ¦Medical Payments ¦$1,000 each person ¦6 ¦ +-------------------------+---------------------+--¦ ¦Comprehensive ¦$100 ¦10¦ +-------------------------+---------------------+--¦ ¦Collision ¦$250 ¦10¦ +--------------------------------------------------+
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦Custom Parts or Equipment¦$1,000 with Comprehensive or Collision¦included¦ +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+-----------------------------------+ +-----------------------------+-----¦ ¦Total premium for 2001 Honda ¦$75 ¦ +-----------------------------+-----¦ ¦Total 12 month policy premium¦$225”¦ +-----------------------------------+
After Paula Kocher filed a petition for authority to settle a minor's personal injury claim, Progressive filed the declaratory judgment complaint that forms the basis of this appeal. The complaint sought a declaration ruling that its liability was limited to $100,000, the policy
limits provided for bodily injury liability for a single vehicle. Each party filed a motion for a summary judgment. The court ruled from the bench at the end of a hearing on the motions. The court first noted that this case is a case of first impression because the court “could find no other case relating to two vehicles that collided with each other covered under the same policy.” The court next pointed to the fact that the declarations page shows policy limits separately for the bodily injury liability coverage for each vehicle but lists the limits for uninsured- and underinsured-motorist coverage only once. The court then explained as follows:
“I don't believe that this policy clearly addresses a situation where two covered vehicles collided. I don't believe that it is unambiguously addressed in this policy. And I believe that-it's a reasonable interpretation where you have three vehicles-and really two is what we are dealing with here-where coverage would be assumed to the limits of bodily injury liability as to each of those vehicles where they collide and both vehicles were operated negligently to injure someone * * *.”
Finally, the court noted that any ambiguity caused by the failure to specifically address this situation must be resolved in favor of coverage. The court denied Progressive's motion for a summary judgment and granted Luke's motion. The court entered its rulings in a docket entry. This appeal followed.
On appeal, Progressive argues that the court below erred in finding that the policy did not unambiguously limit coverage to the $100,000 limit applicable to one vehicle. Because this case involves a question of contract interpretation, which is an issue of law, our review is de novo. Hobbs v. Hartford Insurance Co. of the Midwest, 214 Ill.2d 11, 17, 291 Ill.Dec. 269, 823 N.E.2d 561, 564 (2005).
Insurance policies are subject to the same rules that govern the interpretation of other types of contracts. Hobbs, 214 Ill.2d at 17, 291 Ill.Dec. 269, 823 N.E.2d at 564. Our primary goal is to ascertain and effectuate the intent of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ohio Sec. Ins. Co. v. Truck Tire Sales, Inc., 16 cv 11045
...C 2403, 2018 WL 3740645, at *3 n.2 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 6, 2018) (quoting Progressive Premier Ins. Co. of Ill. v. Kocher ex rel. Fleming , 402 Ill. App. 3d 756, 761, 342 Ill.Dec. 633, 932 N.E.2d 1094, 1098 (5th Dist. 2010) ); see also Alshwaiyat v. Am. Serv. Ins. Co. , 2013 IL App (1st) 123222, ......
-
People Of The State Of Ill. v. Abernathy
...at 1193, 299 Ill.Dec. 320, 841 N.E.2d at 1062. III. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the trial court's judgment. As 402 Ill.App.3d 756part of our judgment, we award the State its $50 statutory assessment against defendant as costs of this appeal. Affirmed. KNECHT and McCULLOU......
-
Nationwide Agribusiness Ins. Co. v. Dugan
...Ins. Co., 386 Ill.Dec. 467, 20 N.E.3d 843, 848 (Ill.App.Ct.2014) (3d District); Progressive Premier Ins. Co. v. Kocher, 402 Ill.App.3d 756, 342 Ill.Dec. 633, 932 N.E.2d 1094, 1102 (2010) (5th District); Johnson v. Davis, 377 Ill.App.3d 602, 318 Ill.Dec. 290, 883 N.E.2d 521, 529 (2007) (5th ......
-
Hess v. Estate of Klamm
...431 Ill.Dec. 221, 127 N.E.3d 754. In addition, we do not discuss our decision in Progressive Premier Insurance Co. of Illinois v. Kocher , 402 Ill. App. 3d 756, 342 Ill.Dec. 633, 932 N.E.2d 1094 (2010), as that case involved stacking of coverage for two vehicles that were both involved in t......