A unanimous Illinois Supreme Court agreed automobile insurance carriers must cover injuries for their policy holders who are injured if hit by a car while they are riding bicycles, not just while using their automobiles.
Justice Lisa Holder White wrote the 7-0 opinion, filed Nov. 30.
According to court background, the underlying incident was an uninsured motorist striking the bicycle of Cristopher Guiracocha, then 14, the son of Fredy Guiracocha, in September 2020. Fredy filed an uninsured motorist claim against his carrier, Direct Auto Insurance Company, which denied the claim because the teen wasn’t occupying a covered vehicle at the time of the crash.
Direct Auto filed a complaint for declaratory judgment endorsing its position, then won a circuit court motion for summary judgment. An Illinois First District Appellate Court panel said the only issue was “whether a provision in an automobile insurance policy that limits uninsured motorist coverage to insureds occupying an ‘insured automobile’ violates” Illinois Insurance Code provisions concerning uninsured and hit-and-run motor vehicle coverage. The appeals court then sided with Guiracocha that the policy was written in conflict with state law.
Before the Supreme Court, both parties agreed the policy, as written, would not cover Cristopher’s injuries. Direct Auto insisted it was legally allowed to limit coverage to people who occupied a vehicle and argued the Supreme Court could be required to distinguish between cyclists and pedestrians.
In addition to arguing the policy violates the Insurance Code, Holder White wrote, “the Guiracochas assert Direct Auto failed to challenge Cristopher’s status as an insured in its motion for summary judgment and conceded he was an insured at oral argument in the appellate court.” However, as a threshold matter, the court opted to overlook the waiver contention.
The court said liability and uninsured motorist overage are linked inextricably under state law because both cover the same public policy goal of ensuring adequate compensation stemming from vehicle crashes.
Direct Auto relied on a 2000 Illinois Third District Appellate Court opinion, Rosenberg v. Zurich American Insurance, a case in which an insurer didn’t have to pay out on a nursing home’s policy for a resident who, while walking, died after being struck by an uninsured motorist. But in that case, Holder White wrote, the panel found the pedestrian wasn’t insured as the home’s “policy stated it extended to family members only if the insured was an individual, which the nursing home was not.”
Another Third District case, the 2007 opinion Stark v. Illinois Emcasco Insurance, also didn’t apply because the issue wasn’t whether a pedestrian was covered but whether a corporation’s policy covered “the company’s sole officer, director and shareholder,” Holder White wrote.
Instead, the court held, the family properly relied on a 1977 Third District opinion, Squire v. Economy Fire & Casualty, which concerned a plaintiff standing on a parkway when they were struck by a parked car in a chain-reaction crash started when an uninsured motorist drove off the roadway. The plaintiff in that case also was the child of the named policy holder, and the panel wrote it was well settled that the Insurance Code “requires coverage of insured persons regardless of the motor vehicle the uninsured motorist is driving, and regardless of the vehicle in which the insured person is located when injured.”
Ultimately, Holder White wrote: “The public policy behind (uninsured motorist) coverage is to place the insured in the same position as if the at-fault party carried the requisite liability insurance. Thus, whether the injured person occupied a vehicle at the time of the accident with an uninsured vehicle is not the proper inquiry.”
The court declined to address Direct Auto’s argument suggesting a distinction between bicyclists and pedestrians.
Disparti Law Group, of Chicago, represented the Guiracocha family. It issued a statement on the decision:
“This is a big win for us and for Cristopher,” said attorney Jonel Metaj. “More importantly, bicyclists and pedestrians in Illinois need to know that they are protected in the event of an automobile collision.”
“Make no mistake, this ruling is a win for all residents of Illinois,” said Larry Disparti, founder of Disparti Law Group. “If you ride a bike in our streets, or are crossing the street, you can have the peace of mind knowing that if you are injured by a hit-and-run or uninsured driver, your insurance will cover you. And if they deny that claim, Disparti Law will be there to stand behind you.”