Bituminous Casualty Corporation v. Iles
992 N.E.2d 1257
Ill. App. Ct.2013Background
- Explosion at the David Stanley #1 Well in White County, Illinois, October 29, 2008, caused injuries and deaths to oil well workers.
- Bituminous Casualty issued two CGL policies: Dutch Creek (Each Occurrence $1M, General Aggregate $2M) and Bulldog Well (Each Occurrence $500k, General Aggregate $1M).
- Bituminous filed an interpleader to deposit the policy limits so workers could claim funds; workers and estates filed lawsuits against various entities linked to the well.
- Counterclaims sought a declaration that the Dutch Creek limit for the explosion was the General Aggregate ($2M) and, for Bulldog Well, the General Aggregate ($1M), not the per-occurrence limits.
- Circuit Court found the policy limits ambiguous and construed them against Bituminous, granting summary judgment for the Aldredges and Iles.
- This appeal requires determining whether the Each Occurrence Limit or General Aggregate Limit controls for a single occurrence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are the policy limits ambiguous regarding per-occurrence vs aggregate? | Aldredges/Iles: ambiguity exists between per-occurrence and aggregate limits. | Bituminous: limits are unambiguous; Each Occurrence applies to a single occurrence. | Not ambiguous; Each Occurrence applies to a single occurrence. |
| Which limit governs a single occurrence causing bodily injury under Coverage A? | Aldredges/Iles: General Aggregate should apply to all injuries from the single occurrence. | Bituminous: Each Occurrence is the cap for a single occurrence; General Aggregate applies to multiple occurrences. | Each Occurrence Limit controls for a single occurrence. |
| Does the declaration/endorsement language alter the interpretation of limits? | Aldredges/Iles: endorsements/declarations imply higher aggregate limits should apply. | Bituminous: endorsements clearly show per-occurrence increases; not ambiguous. | Endorsements not ambiguous; not altering per-occurrence interpretation. |
Key Cases Cited
- Robertson v. Scottsdale Insurance Co., 338 Ill. App. 3d 397 (2003) (per-occurrence language explicit; per-person limits tied to per-occurrence)
- Ware v. First Specialty Insurance Corp., 2013 IL App (1st) 113340 (2013) (one occurrence; per-occurrence limit applies; aggregate not triggered)
- Cincinnati Insurance Co. v. Television Engineering Corp., 265 F. Supp. 2d 1078 (E.D. Mo. 2003) (aggregate limit would nullify per-occurrence limit; not permitted)
- International Surplus Lines Insurance Co. v. Fireman’s Fund Insurance Co., 998 F.2d 504 (7th Cir. 1993) (definition of occurrence vs aggregate limits; occurrence vs aggregate distinction)