TKI The Kelly Insight
The Kelly Institute is a Thought Leader.
 
TKI is plugged into the strategic management information loop. It keeps abreast of emerging developments and their potential application for best practices adaptation to insurance litigation management.
 
TKI will bring you into that loop with reports and updates on information and events that are relevant to core competencies for litigation management.
 
The Kelly Insight will be posted on a monthly basis and will be archived for your reference purposes. Make a point of visiting this site at least once a  month for some essential food for thought.

The Kelly Insight  - TKI# 3 - 2005
 
The Kelly Institute salutes its partner, NAILM, in its launching of a new information update service. Here is a taste of what insurance litigation managers can expect by subscribing to this service.
 
      John G. Kelly, Dean & Chief Knowledge Officer
 

An update from the National Association of Insurance Litigation Management:

Illinois Supreme Court Prohibits UIM Stacking If Policy Language Unambiguous

1/21/2005 

CHICAGO - On January 21, 2005 the Supreme Court of Illinois issued its decision in the consolidated cases of Hobbs v. Hartford Ins. Co. of the Midwest and Anheuser v. Prudential Prop. and Cas. Ins. Co., declaring the unambiguous language of antistacking clauses in insurance policies prohibited the stacking of underinsured-motorist coverage.

"This decision is a major victory for insurers providing automobile coverage in Illinois" said Robert J. Hurns, legislative database manager and counsel for the Property Casualty Insurers Association of
America (PCI), which filed an amicus brief in the case. "The High Court has recognized that where the language of a policy is clear and unambiguous, its provisions should be enforced without any
reinterpretation. Clearly, the policies at issue prohibited the stacking of underinsured-motorist coverage."

The Illinois Supreme Court consolidated Hobbs and Anheuser for review, due to the similarity of issues. The accident in the Hobbs case occurred in June 2000 and the Anheuser case occurred in
September 1999.

In both cases, the plaintiffs contended at trial that the language of their respective policies was ambiguous as to the limits of UIM coverage, thus permitting stacking. In both cases, the trial court
agreed with this argument, and both verdicts were affirmed by the appellate court. The defendant insurers appealed to the Illinois Supreme Court. PCI, along with Farmers Automobile Insurance
Association and Pekin Insurance Company filed an amicus brief, urging the court to uphold the validity of antistacking provisions.

The Illinois Supreme Court reversed the decision of the lower courts, stating that when the respective policies were construed as a whole, the unambiguous language of the antistacking provisions clearly
prohibited stacking of UIM coverage. The Court also indicated that antistacking clauses do not contravene public policy, and that the Illinois Insurance Code expressly authorizes the use of antistacking provisions in motor vehicle insurance policies.

"Hopefully this decision will lay this issue to rest in Illinois, and insurers can go forward knowing a contract is a contract" said Hurns.