R.C. Wegman Constr. Co. v. Admiral Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 04 February 2011 |
| Docket Number | No. 09–2022.,09–2022. |
| Citation | 634 F.3d 371 |
| Parties | R.C. WEGMAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, Plaintiff–Appellant,v.ADMIRAL INSURANCE COMPANY and Brian Budrik, Defendants–Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HEREOn Petition for Rehearing.Deborah Schmitt Bussert, Attorney, Dahl & Bonadies, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff–Appellant.Terrence J. Madden, Bryce Downey, LLC, Chicago, IL, for Defendants–Appellees.
Prior report: 629 F.3d 724.
Admiral's petition for rehearing contends that we held that “where there is a possibility of a verdict in excess of policy limits, there is a conflict of interest between the insurer and the insured.” This characterization ignores the facts that led us to find a conflict (actually just alleged facts, since the complaint was dismissed by the district court). We said that “the conflict in this case arose when Admiral learned that an excess judgment (and therefore a settlement in excess of the policy limits, as judgment prospects guide settlement) was a nontrivial probability in Budrik's suit” (emphasis added). Among the facts supporting that characterization were (1) the nature and severity of the plaintiff's injury, (2) the settlement demand in excess of policy limits, (3) the fact that the case had been slated for trial (and in fact tried), (4) the plaintiff's securing at trial an award double the policy limit, (5) Admiral's admission that its primary litigating strategy was to downplay Wegman's responsibility rather than to deny liability, and (6) Admiral's failure to warn Wegman that it had adopted a strategy that placed Wegman in jeopardy of an excess judgment. Admiral's attorney has admitted taking a gamble by proceeding to trial in hopes of a ruling that Wegman's share of liability was below 25 percent, which would turn a $2 million damages award into a $500,000 award, well below Admiral's $1 million policy limit. Rather than being warned by Admiral, Wegman discovered that the case was going to trial only through an accidental conversation just days before the trial began.
The case is thus like Nandorf, Inc. v. CNA Ins. Cos., 134 Ill.App.3d 134, 88 Ill.Dec. 968, 479 N.E.2d 988 (1985) which involved a compensatory damages claim and a punitive damages claim; the insured wanted to minimize its total liability while the insurer sought to minimize merely the compensatory damages claim because its insurance policy didn't cover punitive damages. Admiral made a similar strategic move when faced with the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Joseph T. Ryerson & Son, Inc. v. Travelers Indem. Co. of Am.
...731.¶ 59 The Seventh Circuit then issued an opinion on denial of the insurer's petition for rehearing. R.C. Wegman Construction Co. v. Admiral Insurance Co. , 634 F.3d 371 (7th Cir. 2011). In that opinion, the court disagreed with the insurer's characterization of its holding as being that ......
-
Am. Safety Cas. Ins. Co. v. Counter
...at the expense of its customer's. See R.C. Wegman Construction Co. v. Admiral Insurance Co., 629 F.3d 724, rehearing denied, 634 F.3d 371 (7th Cir.2011). But that's not a problem in the current situation.) Waukegan, by contrast, does not necessarily know which lawyers are good at defending ......
-
TI Investors of Wis. LLC v. XFPG, LLC, Case No. 13-CV-520-JPS
...19. Cherif, 933 F.2d at 414, n. 13; R.C. Wegman Const. Co. v. Admiral Ins. Co., 629 F.3d 724, 726 (7th Cir. 2011), reh'g denied, 634 F.3d 371 (7th Cir. 2011). Nominal parties, on the other hand, typically have "no ownership interest in the property which is the subject of litigation," and i......
-
Depasquale Steel Erectors Inc. v. Gemini Ins. Co., Case No. 16 C 10892.
...the insurer to foot the bill for independent counsel.But in its brief opinion and order denying rehearing, R.C. Wegman Const. Co. v. Admiral Ins. Co., 634 F.3d 371 (7th Cir. 2011) explained that the possibility of a verdict in excess of the insureds policy limit did not alone drive its deci......
-
Chapter 5
...Insurance Co. v. Bower, 2010 WL 4630486 (N.D. Ind. Nov. 5, 2010). Seventh Circuit: R.C. Wegman Construction Co. v. Admiral Insurance Co., 634 F.3d 371 (7th Cir. 2011); Northfield Insurance Co. v. City of Waukegan, 761 F. Supp.2d 766 (N.D. Ill. 2010). Ninth Circuit: Bayley Construction Co. v......
-
CHAPTER 5 Comprehensive or Commercial General Liability (CGL) Insurance: Coverage A for "Bodily Injury" or "Property Damage" Liabilities
...Insurance Co. v. Bower, 2010 WL 4630486 (N.D. Ind. Nov. 5, 2010). Seventh Circuit: R.C. Wegman Construction Co. v. Admiral Insurance Co., 634 F.3d 371 (7th Cir. 2011); Northfield Insurance Co. v. City of Waukegan, 761 F. Supp.2d 766 (N.D. Ill. 2010). Ninth Circuit: Bayley Construction Co. v......