Quantcast

COOK COUNTY RECORD

Friday, March 29, 2024

Appeals court: Insurance company must defend taxi company vs injury case from blind man who walked into post

State Court
Chicago taxi

CHICAGO — A Chicago-area livery company's insurer must defend that company in a personal injury case brought by a blind man after a driver allegedly caused him to walk into a cement pillar outside a hospital, a state appeals court has ruled.

In its 12-page opinion issued Oct. 11, the Illinois First District Appellate Court three-justice panel concluded that My Personal Taxi and Livery Service's policy with First Chicago Insurance Company "did not expressly exclude" loading or unloading of passengers.

"Secondly, since the property loading and unloading exclusion only excludes injuries and damage before [the] livery service accepts property and after [the] livery service delivers it, First Chicago's policy language does not exclude injuries or damage arising after [the] livery service accepted property and before [the] livery service delivered it even if that acceptance or delivery was outside the insured vehicle," the opinion said. "Thus the policy does not limit coverage of use of an insured vehicle to operation of the vehicle nor exclude coverage for injuries or damage occurring outside the vehicle."


Illinois First District Appellate Court Sheldon A. "Shelly" Harris | harrisforjustice.com

The appellate court's opinion reversed an earlier circuit court judgment in favor of First Chicago and entered judgment in favor of the blind man, Ronald Dixon.

This opinion addressed only whether First Chicago has a duty to defend the livery service against Dixon's lawsuit.

"That said, we do not consider it remote to the livery driver-passenger relationship that a driver who just drove a passenger to the vicinity of his destination would assist a passenger who needs assistance - whether blind, disabled, or merely over laden with luggage - the remainder of the way to his destination," the opinion sad. "We do not consider such assistance as occurring 'after that work has been completed or abandoned' where the work of a livery driver is transporting a passenger door-to-door."

Assisting a passenger "[the] last few steps" to the intended destination "is rationally connected to, and a reasonable consequence of, the livery driver and passenger using the livery vehicle to take the passenger most of the way there," the opinion said.

Justice Sheldon A. Harris wrote the opinion. Justices Maureen E. Connors and Mary L. Mikva concurred.

Dixon's appeal involved his personal injury claims against the livery service and livery service employee Juan Rangel in 2016.

Dixon, who is legally blind, hired the livery service to transport him to a Department of Veteran Affairs hospital for a medical appointment in February 2016, according to the background portion of the appellate court's opinion. The livery service's agreement with the VA included assisting passengers to the hospital entrance, according to the opinion.

"As Rangel escorted or assisted Dixon to the hospital entrance, Rangel allegedly caused Dixon to walk into a cement pillar," the opinion said. "Dixon alleged that [the] livery service and Rangel owed him a duty of ordinary care in transporting and escorting him and then breached that duty so that Dixon was injured as a proximate result."

First Chicago asked the circuit court to declare its coverage of the livery service did not cover Dixon's injuries and that the insurance company "had no duty to defend" the livery service or Rangel, the opinion said.

"First Chicago argued that Dixon's alleged injuries were not caused by an accident 'resulting from the ownership, maintenance or use of a covered auto' as provided in the policy," the opinion said. "First Chicago thus sought a judgment that it was not obligated to defend [the] livery service or Rangel regarding Dixon’s claims."

Dixon alleged the policy covered multiple livery service vehicles and named drivers, including Rangel.

"Dixon argued that the policy expressly excluded damages from handling property to or from an insured vehicle but did not similarly exclude damages from escorting passengers to or from an insured vehicle," the opinion said. "He also argued that the policy did not exclude loading or unloading from use as [the] livery service’s nonautomobile policy provided."

Following cross-motions for summary judgment by First Chicago and Dixon, the circuit court granted summary judgment in favor of the insurance company. Dixon appealed.

In its opinion, the appellate court rejected a First Chicago argument that there was "no causal connection" between the livery service's vehicle, driven by Rangel, and Dixon's alleged injury, the opinion said.

"Dixon would not have been assisted or escorted to the hospital entrance by Rangel when he was allegedly injured due to Rangel’s negligence had Dixon not been using [the] livery service's vehicle insured by First Chicago to go to the hospital," the opinion said. "Stated another way, Rangel would not have allegedly injured Dixon had Rangel not been using the insured vehicle to take Dixon to the hospital for hire."

According to Cook County court records, Dixon has been represented by attorney James P. Costello, of Chicago.

My Personal Taxi has been represented by the Donnelly Law Firm LLC, of Chicago.

First Chicago has been represented by the firm of Morse Bolduc & Nardulli, of Chicago.

Unrelated to the case, Sheldon Harris, who has been on the appellate court for nine years, is seeking the Illinois Supreme Court First District seat formerly held by Justice Charles Freeman, who retired in June 2018. Justice P. Scott Neville Jr. was appointed to the First District seat upon Freeman's retirement pending results of the general election in November 2020. Harris and Neville are part of a field of candidates running in the March primaries. Other candidates include appellate court justices Jesse Reyes, Nathaniel Howse, Margaret McBride, and Cynthia Cobbs, and attorney Daniel Epstein.

More News