Tressler attorneys William K. McVisk and Kari Shane secured a victory in the Seventh Circuit, which affirmed a summary judgment ruling that their insurance company client did not have a duty to defend its insured in a wrongful death suit alleging that the underlying plaintiff was killed due to work injuries allegedly caused by the actions of the insured. The underlying suit alleged that the insured’s employees were running tests on a large industrial press, which used metal bars, referred to as shims, to configure the machine. During the testing of the press, the operator lowered the head of the press, causing it to contact the shims, and one shim shot out of the corner of the press and struck the decedent in the abdomen, resulting in his death.

Before the incident, the insured had received a “serious” violation from the state occupational safety and health administration for ineffectively guarding the equipment. The underlying plaintiff alleged that, as a result, the insured knew that its employees were in danger of being struck due to its policy and practice of operating the machinery without protective shields to safeguard its employees. The plaintiff further alleged that the insured had actual knowledge of a system that would have allowed its employees to avoid using the shims but failed to install it, forcing its employees to use the shims. The underlying plaintiff alleged that the insured acted with “gross negligence and in a willful and wanton manner” and acted “with actual intent to cause injury” to the decedent.

The insurance company filed a declaratory judgment action against its insured, arguing that it had no duty to defend or indemnify the insured with respect to the claim because the claim either fell within the ambit of the exclusive remedy provision of the state Workers’ Compensation Act, which was excluded under the insurance policy, or resulted from intentional conduct, meaning it did not involve an accident and was subject to the intentional acts exclusion. The trial court and the Seventh Circuit both agreed with the insurance company’s position and ruled that the allegations of the suit were either subject to the Workers’ Compensation exclusion of the policy or involved intentional acts and were therefore excluded from coverage.

Congratulations on a fantastic result, Bill and Kari!

About William K. McVisk

William “Bill” McVisk is a partner in Tressler’s Litigation Practice Group. Bill focuses his practice on complex insurance coverage litigation, hospital law, and medical liability. He has handled all areas of coverage and bad faith litigation, especially third-party bad faith and coverage litigation involving commercial general liability, professional liability coverages as well as personal lines coverages such as auto and homeowners coverages.

About Kari Shane

Kari Shane is an associate in Tressler’s Insurance Practice Group in the Chicago Office. Kari advises insurers on policy matters, including professional liability, fidelity bonds, directors’ and officers’ liability, commercial general liability, employment practices liability, and first-party property claims. Additionally, she handles insurance coverage analysis disputes and litigation.

About Tressler LLP

Headquartered in Chicago, with ten offices located in six states, Tressler LLP is a national law firm comprised primarily of attorneys who devote their practice to the representation of the insurance industry in coverage analysis and resolution, litigation, underwriting consultation, product development, claims management, and reinsurance.

In addition, Tressler has one of the most experienced and multi-faceted government law practices in Illinois, and has attorneys who represent clients in commercial litigation, defense litigation, corporate transactions, employment law and litigation, intellectual property, and condominium and common interest community association law.

For more information, please visit www.tresslerllp.com.