Author Archives: agatha

Kakos v. Center of Brain and Spine Surgery, S.C., et al.

On December 21, 2015, Circuit Court of Cook County Associate Judge William Edward Gomolinski ruled that the reduction of 12-person juries to 6-person juries in civil trials in Illinois is unconstitutional.  Former Illinois Governor Pat Quinn had signed a bill as a lame duck reducing civil juries from 12 to 6 persons.

Section I, Article 13 of the 1970 state constitution states that “[t]he right to trial by jury as heretofore enjoyed shall remain inviolate.”  Judge Gomolinski construed the language to mean that the right to a jury as it existed in 1970, with 12 jurors, cannot be changed without constitutional amendment.   The ruling was part of an underlying medical-malpractice case filed in the Circuit Court of Cook County—Kakos v. Center of Brain and Spine Surgery, S.C., et al.

Although it is expected to be appealed directly to the Illinois Supreme Court, Judge Gomolinski’s ruling is a step in the right direction for defendants sued in Illinois (particularly in Cook County) as the reduction of juries from 12 to 6 persons provided an advantage to plaintiffs by requiring plaintiffs to convince only 6 minds rather than 12.

Submitted by Zachary Shook

Mike Huber was an invited speaker at Rush University Medical Center Anesthesia Department’s CME Seminar on Global Practice Strategies on October 29.

On October 10, Cray Huber attorneys Ben Beringer and Aimee Lipkis presented an interactive workshop at the Annual Meeting of the Illinois Society of Podiatric Medical Assistants entitled, “The Deposition Survival Guide.”

Pekin Insurance Company v. CSR Roofing Contractors, Inc., 2015 IL App (1st) 142473 (September 21, 2015) Cook Co., 1st Div. (LIU)

Reversed and remanded with directions.
Insurer of subcontractor has duty to defend additional insured under terms of commercial general liability policy issued to a third party, the general roofing contractor, in a personal injury suit brought by employee of that contractor’s subcontractor, who sustained serious injuries when he fell from roof of a building at the worksite. General roofing contractor’s master subcontractor agreement (MSA) shows that parties sought to limit general roofing contractor’s potential exposure to vicarious liability, ensuring that it was covered in case of worksite accident such as incident here. Amended complaint contains allegations that could result in finding that general roofing contractor is liable for employee’s injuries, solely on basis of acts or omissions of subcontractor, court erred in granting judgment on pleadings for subcontractor’s insurer.(SIMON and NEVILLE, concurring.)

West Bend Mutual Insurance Co. v. DJW-Ridgeway Building Consultants, Inc.

Jeff Siderius obtained a favorable ruling recently from the Second District Illinois appellate court on behalf of a general contractor and its insurance carrier in a declaratory judgment action filed by West Bend Insurance Company.   The general contractor, DJW-Ridgeway Building Consultants, was sued by an employee of one of its subcontractors who slipped in a rut and fell on the construction site.  DJW-Ridgeway tendered its defense to West Bend, the insurance carrier for its masonry subcontractor, Jason the Mason, seeking a defense as an additional insured.  West Bend denied coverage and filed a declaratory judgment action in the Circuit Court of Lake County.  West Bend argued there was no coverage for DJW-Ridgeway as an additional insured because there was no “written contract or written agreement” between Jason the Mason and DJW-Ridgeway.  West Bend also argued that even if DJW qualified as an additional insured, it had no duty to defend since its policy stated it was excess unless a written contract “specifically requires” that it be primary and no such requirement was contained in the contract.  The Second District Illinois appellate court upheld the trial court’s award of summary judgment in favor of DJW on both issues, finding that a proposal and a separate subcontract agreement constituted a single written contract, and that the insurance requirements of the contract required Jason the Mason to provide primary coverage for DJW in spite of the fact it did not contain the word “primary.”  Thus, the court held West Bend owed DJW a duty to defend as an additional insured on a primary basis.

West Bend Mutual Insurance Co. v. DJW-Ridgeway Building Consultants, Inc., 2015 IL App (2d) 140441.

Pekin Insurance Company v. CSR Roofing Contractors, Inc.

Jeff Siderius recently obtained a favorable ruling on behalf of a general contractor and its insurance carrier in a declaratory judgment action filed by Pekin Insurance Company.   The general contractor, CSR Roofing Contractors, was sued by an employee of its subcontractor who fell off a roof while working and sustained injuries.  CSR tendered its defense to Pekin, which insured the subcontractor, seeking a defense as an additional insured.  Pekin denied coverage and filed a declaratory judgment action in the Chancery Division of Cook County Circuit Court.  Pekin argued its additional insured endorsement, which on its face restricted coverage to vicarious liability, did not apply because its named insured was not a defendant in the employee’s complaint.  The court found the trial court’s refusal to consider the subcontract was error and that the allegations against CSR, when interpreted together with the subcontract, were sufficient to leave open the possibility that CSR could be found vicariously liable for the subcontractor’s negligence.  Thus, the appellate court held Pekin had a duty to defend CSR as an additional insured and reversed the judgment of the trial court.

Pekin Insurance Company v. CSR Roofing Contractors, Inc., No. 14-2473 (Aug. 4, 2015)