Wheeler v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co.
Decision Date | 14 May 1973 |
Docket Number | No. 57607,57607 |
Citation | 11 Ill.App.3d 841,298 N.E.2d 329 |
Parties | E. Todd WHEELER and the Perkins and Will Partnership, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. The AETNA CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant. |
Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
Tom L. Yates and Frederic L. Goff, Chicago, for plaintiffs-appellees.
This is an appeal from a summary judgment entered in a declaratory judgment action for the plaintiff architects against their public liability insurer, holding, in substance, that it should have assumed their defense in a Structural Work Act suit filed against a hospital, its general contractor and them by a worker who fell from a scaffold when a plank gave way.
On November 11, 1968, Aetna issued to Perkins and Will a Public Liability insurance policy which included by endorsement, the following exclusion:
'EXCLUSION
'(ENGINEERS, ARCHITECTS OR SURVEYORS PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY)
'IT IS AGREED THAT THE INSURANCE DOES NOT APPLY TO BODILY INJURY OR PROPERTY DAMAGE ARISING OUT OF ANY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PERFORMED BY OR FOR THE NAMED INSURED, INCLUDING
'(1) THE PREPARATION OR APPROVAL OF MAPS, PLANS, OPINIONS, REPORTS, SURVEYS, DESIGNS OR SPECIFICATIONS AND
'(2) SUPERVISORY, INSPECTION OR ENGINEERING SERVICES.
On April 20, 1969, Perkins and Will also took out a Professional Liability insurance policy from another (CNA) insurer, the coverage being stated as follows:
'The company will pay on behalf of the insured all sums which the insured shall become legally obligated to pay as damages if legal liability arises out of the performance of professional services for others in the insured's capacity as an architect or an engineer and if such legal liability is caused by an error, omission or negligent act.'
On June 20, 1964, Perkins and Will entered into a contract with the Silver Cross Hospital for professional services in connection with additions and alterations to that hospital. John Wagner, an ironworker employed by a subcontractor, claims to have been injured on September 29, 1969, while working on that job and on January 22, 1970, filed a Structural Work Act suit against the hospital, the general contractor, S. N. Nielsen & Company, and the architects, Perkins and Will.
Said complaint, Inter alia, alleged:
On January 27, 1970, Perkins and Will forwarded a copy of the Wagner complaint and summons to Aetna with an accompanying letter demanding that it defend them. A copy of this was sent to CNA that same day with an accompanying letter advising that the architects had asked Aetna to assume their defense but stating that, if Aetna declined, they would expect CNA to defend and hold them harmless under the said Professional Liability policy.
On February 4, 1970, Aetna wrote Perkins and Will, taking the position that the allegations of the complaint were not covered under the Public Liability policy and were expressly excluded under the endorsement above quoted. It suggested that the complaint be forwarded to their Professional Liability carrier.
CNA then engaged Tom Yates and Fred Goff to defend the said Wagner suit, which they are doing and said action is still pending in the circuit court.
On July 27, 1971, the instant declaratory judgment action was filed by said attorneys Yates and Goff in the names of the architects, with CNA paying their fees. After the filing of various pleadings, motions and affidavits and the taking of a deposition of William Hurley, house counsel for Perkins and Will, both parties moved for summary judgment, which was entered in favor of the plaintiff architects and against the defendant Aetna. In said summary judgment order the trial judge took the position, Inter alia, that:
'paragraph 4 means, to me, that each defendant 'erected, controlled and placed in a manner which was not safe, suitable and proper' a scaffold,'
and therefore that:
'the complaint stated a cause of action potentially covered by Aetna that Aetna breached by refusing to defend and is now estopped to deny overage.'
This appeal followed.
As the plaintiff points out, there is a line of cases in Illinois which holds generally that an insurer is bound to defend its insured when the allegations of the injury complaint bring the claim potentially within the coverage of the policy; or, in other words, the injury complaint must show on its face that there is no coverage before an insurance carrier can safely refuse to defend. Three cases, Sims v. Illinois Nat. Casualty Co. of Springfield, 43 Ill.App.2d 184, 193 N.E.2d 123 (3rd Dist., 1963); McFadyen v. North River Ins. Co., 62 Ill.App.2d 164, 209 N.E.2d 833 (2d Dist., 1965); and Palmer v. Sunberg, 71 Ill.App.2d 22, 217 N.E.2d 463 (3rd Dist., 1966); are cited. All arose where the insured, whom the company involved had refused to defend, had suffered a judgment. In the first (Sims), the injury complaint alleged that plaintiff was injured while riding as a passenger in a truck owned and operated by Sims. The insurer refused to defend on the ground that plaintiff was the defendant's employee in the course of his employment at the time and was thus excluded under a Workmen's Compensation exclusion. In the second (McFadyen), the insurer refused to defend on the ground that the automobile being driven at the time of the accident was not an 'owned' automobile and was hence excluded; and in the third (Palmer), a minor bitten by a dog, sued the owner thereof under a Home Owner's policy and the company refused to defend on the ground that the premises were being used for business and not residential purposes and were thus excluded. These are representative of the cases generally.
Assuming for the present that the general statements above set out correctly state the Illinois law (there are certain limitations and exceptions, particularly when the allegations collide with what the court judicially knows, which will be referred to later on), let us put ourselves in the places of the claim supervision for the defendant Aetna and of the trial court as we read the complaint in this case against the two policies involved.
As set out in the above factual re sume , the plaintiff architects had entered into a contract with the Silver Cross Hospital for professional services in connection with additions and alterations to that hospital. In January, 1970, John Wagner, an ironworker employed by a subcontractor filed a Structural Work Act suit against said hospital, the general contractor, S. N. Nielsen & Company, and the plaintiff architects; and copies of said complaint, with covering letters, were sent to Aetna, the Public Liability carrier and to CNA, the Professional Liability carrier.
Insofar as is here pertinent the Structural Work Act complaint alleged:
It would appear to us to be clear that par. 2, if it alleges anything against these architects, alleges liability arising only out of their '(1) Preparation or approval of Maps, Plans, Opinions, Reports, Surveys, Designs or Specifications', or '(2) Supervisory, Inspection or Engineering Services' and which was expressly excluded from the coverage afforded by the Aetna Public Liability policy and fell precisely within the coverage of the CNA Professional Liability policy which provided that:
'The company will pay on behalf of the insured all sums which the insured shall become legally obligated to pay as damages if legal liability arises out of the performance of professional services for others in the insured's capacity as an architect or an engineer and if such legal liability is caused by an error, omission or negligent act.'
It is interesting and instructive to note that, subsequent to the trial court's summary judgment here, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
American Economy Ins. v. Holabird and Root
...App.3d at 303-04, 77 Ill.Dec. 848, 461 N.E.2d 471. The trial court also considered the decision in Wheeler v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 11 Ill.App.3d 841, 854, 298 N.E.2d 329 (1973), in which the court took judicial notice "`that employees of contractors and subcontractors place and oper......
-
Curtis by Curtis v. Cook County
...of a matter which the circuit court failed to so do. Ill.Rev.Stat.1981, ch. 51, par. 48g; Wheeler v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Company (1st Dist. 1973), 11 Ill.App.3d 841, 852, 298 N.E.2d 329; Ashland Savings and Loan Assoc. v. Aetna Insurance Company (1st Dist. 1974), 18 Ill.App.3d 70, 77-78......
-
Illinois Commerce Commission v. Salamie
...in the receiving state. Indeed, since we are not required to be more ignorant than the average man (Wheeler v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. (1973), 11 Ill.App.3d 841, 298 N.E.2d 329, vacated as moot 57 Ill.2d 184, 311 N.E.2d 134), we will take judicial notice that attorneys have acted as hon......
-
Fidelity & Cas. Co. of New York v. Envirodyne Engineers, Inc.
...conjunction with the contract and the deposition, the trial judge also considered the decision in Wheeler v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. (1973), 11 Ill.App.3d 841, 854, 298 N.E.2d 329, 338, vacated as moot, 57 Ill.2d 184, 311 N.E.2d 134, where the court took judicial notice "that employees ......