Background
Ronald and Ellen Saslow were injured in a car accident while driving one of five vehicles insured by Bankers Standard Insurance. The auto policy included medical expenses and uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage with specific limits. The Saslows filed claims and received partial payments but sought additional recovery by stacking coverage limits across their five vehicles and under an umbrella policy. The district court granted summary judgment to the insurer, finding the policy unambiguous and the delay in payment non-vexatious.
The court’s reasoning
The court applied de novo review to the summary judgment ruling and interpreted the insurance policies under Illinois law. The court found the anti-stacking language in both the auto and umbrella policies unambiguous, stating that the coverage limit was the most the insurer would pay per occurrence regardless of the number of people or vehicles involved. The court rejected the argument that separate premiums or the listing of limits on multiple declaration pages created ambiguity. Regarding the claim for penalties under the Illinois Insurance Code, the court found no evidence that the insurer’s delay was willful or unreasonable, noting that the company repeatedly attempted to issue payments.
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces that clear anti-stacking clauses in insurance policies will be enforced even when policyholders pay separate premiums for multiple vehicles, limiting their ability to aggregate coverage limits.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download