FIFTH DIVISION August 17, 2007

No. 1-05- 1656
BREN DA N REG AN , Plai ntif f-A ppelle e, v. MUTUAL OF

OMAHA INSURANCE COMPA

NY, De f en da n t-A pp el l an t. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Appe al fro m the Ci rcu i t Cou rt of Coo k C oun

ty

Ho no r ab le Pet er Flynn, Judge Presidin

g. JU STI CEO’ MA

RA FR OS SA RDde l i v ered th e op i n i on of th e c our t: Plai ntif f Bren dan Regan

brought this ac

tion agai nst def endan t Mutual of Om

aha Ins urance Co mpany seek ing a de clara t or y judgment t hat per so nal injuries he s ust ained w hile on a s t ude nt baseb all tri

p to Florida were covered b y a policy is sued by defen dant. Plai ntif f an d defen dant each f i l ed a m oti on f or s um mary j udg men t. The tri al cou rt en tere d a n or de r gran ti ng pl ai nti f f 's moti on f or sum mary j udgm en t and an order deny

i ng d ef endan t's m otion f or sum mary j udgm en t. De fen da nt no w a pp ea ls t ho se t wo o r de r s. We affir m. BACK GROUND The pleadi

ngs, m ot ions , and attached exh

ibits establ

is h the f oll owing f acts. In March 20 02 , pl ai n ti f f , a stu den t at S t. A m b ros e U n i v er si ty i n Da v en por t, Iowa, an

d a mem b er of th e S t. Ambro se ba seba ll team, went t o F lor ida wit h t he t eam t o p ar t icipat e in a base ball to ur nament1-05-1656

2

called t he Ho mest ead Challenge . O n Mar ch 13 , 2 002 , t he t eam's o nly schedu led "d ay off" d ur ing t he t ou rna ment, plaint iff

sus t ained a spinal co rd injury when he d ove into a wa ve and st ru ck t he
ocean f l oor at a be ach

adj acent to the h

otel w here the team wasstay i ng. A t the ti me of the ac ci de nt, St. A

m br ose wa s a mem be r of the Na ti ona l A ss oci ati on of Intercoll egi ate Athl etics (NA IA). As a m

em ber, St. Amb

rose was required b

y the NAIA b yl aws t o be enr olled in t he NAI A cat ast ro phic at hletic injur y insuranc e pr og ra m under a po licy i ssu ed by def endan t. The po licy stat es in pa rt t hat defend ant will i nsur e st ude nt at hlete s in all sanct ioned and offi cial ly recog ni zed intercollegi

ate spo rts ( Class

I) and pay ben

efi ts as follows: "Coverage i s provide d for partici pation i n sch edul ed gam

es, supervised pra cti cese ss i ons

an d du ri ng au thor ize d gr oup or tea m trav el tha t i s p ai d f or or reim bursed b y the Sponsoring Organ

iz ation i n conn ection wi th such gam es or pra cti ce s ess i ons." The policy

defi nes "covered tr avel " as follows: " 'Co ver ed T ra vel' means t eam o r g ro up t ra vel by part icipant s in a Cov ered Ev en t: (a) di re ctl y to or f rom a C ov ered

Ev en t; (b) aut hor ized a nd pa id for or re imbursed by the Sp ons or ing Or ganiza t ion; and (c) supervised by

staff me mb ers or a design

ated
re pr ese nt at ive of t he Sp ons or ing1-05-1656

3 Or ganiza t ion. Cov ere d Travel

be gi ns wi th d ep arti ng f rom the mee ti ng pl ac e f or suc h t ra vel and e nds u po n t he r elease of t he I nsur ed fr om t he Spons orin g Orga ni zation' s su

perv i sion." T he t r ip t o Flo r ida fo rt he ba se ba ll t o ur na men t wa s a ut ho r ize d b y St
. Ambr o se an d p aid f or with m oney from the uni versi ty athletic departme

nt fun d and team

fun drais in g activ ities. Each play er on th e team wasrequi

red to pay

f or the cost of h

i s ai rf are, h otel, a nd f ood duri ng th e tri p. Pla int iff t es t ified in his de po sit io n t ha t in o r de rt o r ais e mo ne y t o co ve rt he se co st s, he an d h is teamm ates sought and recei

ved pl edges f rom sponsors bas ed upon the num ber of m il es they ran durin g condi tioni ng. The m

oney rais ed by the pla ye rs in turn went in

to a fun d whi ch Coach J

am es Calla han contro ll ed and used to pay

for the team' s ai

rfare as well as hotel an

d me al expenses duri ng th e tri p. St
. Ambr o se pa id fo rt he pla yer s' t r an sp o r t at io n t o an d fr o m Mid wa y air po r t in Chicag o a nd t he airp or t in Miami as w ell as t o a nd fro m baseball games sche duled dur ing t he tour n am en t i n Fl ori da . Th e u n i v er si ty also p ai d th e c ost of en ter i n g th e tou rnam en t. On Ma rc h 9, 200 2, t he St . Ambro se ba seba ll team, Co ach C allahan, and t hre e as sist ant coaches m

et at St . Am

brose's i ndoor spor ts arena and b oarded a bus that to ok t hem to Mi dway Ai rport i n Chi cago. Th e team and coache s the

n f l ew to Mi am i ; up on the i

r arri va l , they were t ake n in vans t o t he Co mfort Inn H ot el in Miami Bea ch. Co ach C allahan cho se t he Co mfort Inn b ec au se i t wa s af f ord ab l e a n d i n a s af e a re a. The S t. A

m b ros e b as eb al

l tea m wa s s ch ed ul ed to play at the H ome stead

Chal l enge i n H ome stead , Fl

orid a, on M arch

10, 11, 1 2, an

d 14-1 7 of

2002. No base ball games o r p ra ct ice ses sions wer e sc hedu led fo r Ma rc h 13, 200 2, which wa s t he t eam's1-05-1656

4

"day of f " f rom th e tou rnam en t. Coach Cal l ahan testi f i ed i n h i s de posi tion regar di ng r ul es that mem

bers of the tea m were requi red to f oll ow whi l e i

n M i am i
. Those rules provi

ded, in ter alia , that play

ers were to go everywh ere as a gro up. If a play

er wanted t o go any

where on his own, he had to have a "buddy ";
even w ith a bu ddy, players had t o firs t re ceive p er mission fro m one o f the co ache s befo re leaving t he gr ou p. Player s we re pr ohibit ed fr om co nsuming alco hol less t han 48 hou rs be for e any sc hed ule d g ame and we re pr o hibit ed fro m having o ver nigh t gu es t s in t heir ho t el r o o ms. If a pla ye r fai le d to follow these rul

es, he would be sub

je ct to dis ci

pli ne b y the coaches. These

rules were in ef fect thro ughout the tr ip, during the rest day as wel l as gam e days. Upon arriv

in g at the Comf

ort Inn, the pl

ay ers went to t he rooms to whi ch they had b een assigne d by Assist ant Co ach T ony Hu nt ley. The co ache s pr ohibit ed t he player s fro m or der ing
ro om se rvice, and t he t elepho nes in t he player s' ro oms w er e shu t off t o lo ng dist ance ser vice. The pla yer s w er e s ub

jec t t o a b ed ch ec k e ac h e ve ning at 10 p. m. , at wh ich t ime t he y we r e t o be in thei r rooms wi th the i r l i ghts out and attem pti ng to sl eep. Ac cordi ng to Coac

h C al l ahan , on the

team 's day off , plai ntif f and hi s team mates were "pretty muc

h left to t hei

r own devices." Play

ers were f ree to pur sue i

ndi vi dual recreational activ ities i n south Fl orida wi th each other, their paren

ts, frie nds, an d girl fri ends. Coach C alla

han stated t hat on the team' s day off , he went to a nearby

barber s hop for a hai

rcut. Assi stant Coach Tony Huntley

lef t Miam i Beach and went to the Minn

esot a Twins'

trainin g faci li ty in Fort Myers. Plai ntif f testif ie d in hi s deposition regardin

g rules that he and h

is teamm ates were required t o fo llo w. Pla int iff ex pla ine d t ha t t he y we r e a llo we d t o wa lk int he ar ea ar o un d t he ho t el,1-05-1656

5

including o ut ont o t he bea ch, wit hou t having t o r epo rt t o a nybody. Acco rd ing t o p laintiff, he and hi s te am mate s " were b as i cal l

y tol d that if

[th ey ] we re g oi ng to l ea ve or go s omew

he re ou tsi deof the hotel or after a gam

e, that [t hey

] were supposed to tell

the coaches." There we

re random b ed checks duri

ng the pl ay ers' stay at the Comf

ort Inn, an

d if they fai le d to tell coaches wh

ere they
we r e g o ing o rgo t ca ug ht do ing so met hing t he y we r e n o t su pp o se d t o do , t he y wo uld pr o ba bly not get to pl ay . Shortl y be f ore n oon on Ma rch 13, 200 2, th

e te am 's da y of f , pl ai nti f f l ef t hi s h otel room and wa lke d w it h his t ea mmat e C ain R ea so n t o t he b ea ch a dja ce nt t o t he C o mfor t In n. Pla int iff sta ted th at th ere w ere a

swi m m i n g p ool an d f en ce b eh i n d th e h otel an d e x pl ai n ed th at i n ord er to ge t to the be ac h a rea , i t wa s n ec es sa ry to ex i t a g ateatta ch

ed to tha t f en cean d w al k over a hi l l or roug h a rea wh i ch res em bl ed a l i ttl e p i er. Th ere

wa s n ot a l i f eg ua rd on duty , an d n o mem be r of the St. A m br ose coach i ng sta f f wa s p res en

t at the b each . Pl

ai nti f f di d n ot ad vi se an d w asnot
r eq uir ed t o ad vise an y o f t he co ac he s t ha t he wa s g o ing t o t ha t be ac h be ca us e it wa s imme dia t ely adj acent to the h

otel. Aft er ar r iving at t he be ac h, pla int iff r an int o t he o ce an , do ve he ad firs t int o a w av e, an d h it hi s head on a concealed sandb ar. T eamm ates o n the beach pul

led pl ain tiff from the water; as a
resu l t of the di vi ng a cci den t, pl ai ntif f sustai ne d a pa ral y zi ng s pi na l cord i nj ury . Aft er pla int iff wa s inju r ed , a c laim w as mad e o n his be ha lf un de rt he po licy a t iss ue in t his
ca se . D efe nda nt de nied t he c laim bas ed o n it s c o nclu sio n t hat "t he inju ry o cc ur re d d ur ing a n o ff day and the i nj ury di d not o ccur durin

g a schedul

ed gam e or supervis ed practice se ssion nor travel di r ec t ly [ sic ] or from a schedul ed game or supervised practice session."1-05-1656

6

The re aft er , p laintiff fi

led t he inst ant dec larat or y judgment act ion, see king a finding t hat he
was a co ver ed insu re d und er t he po licy i ssu ed by de fendant and t hus e nt itled t o r ece ive all the be ne f i ts a va i l ab l e to h i m un de r th at p ol i cy . Pl

ai nti f f an d de f en da nt e ac h f i l ed a m oti on f or summ ary j udgment. In its motion for summ ary j udgment, defendant contended t hat "[b]ecause [ pla int iff's ] inju ry o cc ur r ed wh ile s wimming o n his o wn pe r so na l fre e t ime, his a ct ivit ies fall outsi de th e Covered A

cti vi tie s an d Eve nts" des cri

be d i n the pol i cy . In h i s m otion f or sum mary j udgm en t, p l ai n ti f f con ten de d th at th e en ti retri p, f rom th e ti me th at th e p l ay er s dep ar ted f rom St. Ambr o se 's in do o rsp o r t s a r en a u nt il t he y re t ur ne d t o t he St
. Ambr o se ca mpu s, wa s " o ne sing le i nc i den t of travel duri ng th e ex tent of whi ch the p oli cy wasi n f ull f orce an d ef f ect." Fo llowing a he ar ing o n t he mot ions, t he t rial co ur t ent er ed a n or der gr ant ing plaint iff 's
m otion f or sum mary j udgm en t and den y i ng d ef endan t's m otion f or sum mary j udgm en t. In su pport of i ts ruli ng, the court focused on the port ion of the policy's def

in ition of covered travel

whi ch states "[c]overed tr avel

begi ns wi th departing f

rom the m

eetin g pla ce for such

travel an d ends upo n t he r elease of t he I nsur ed fr om t he Sp ons or ing Or ganiza t ion's s upe rvisio n." Sp ecifically, the court observed:

"Bo t h sides he re have a ckno wledg ed t hat t hat sent ence canno t fairly be construed to me an that any thin g an i nsured does duri

ng the course of covered t r av el is - o ran yt hing t he st ud en t do es du r ing t he co ur se o f co ve r ed t r av el is aut omat ically

insure d eve n if what t he st ude nt do es is co mplet ely out side t he
n orm al re al m of th e trav el . Th at is w h y du ri ng th e d i sc us si on , pa rti cul arl y wi th Mr. Smith, I in

voked t he concept o f f

rolic an d deto ur because I t hi

nk that has a very cl ose resembla

nce to the kin

d of anal ys is that we have to undertake here.1-05-1656

7 The re aso n t his case is diffi cult is tha t what Mr. Reg an wa s do ing at t he tim e he was in jured was not a froli

c and detour in the

sens e that it was
unau t hor ized o r w ro ng, which is whe re you u sua lly see fro lic and de t ou r a pplying in master and certain

li abi li ty cases . But it was arguabl y a frolic and detour beca use it w as a n unplanne d eve nt which wa s no t par t of t he planne d eve nt s o n t he t r ip. I t wa s no t so met hing t he co ac he s o rt he sc ho o l t o ld h im t o do no rwa s it
so mething t hey had fo rbidd en him to do . I t was simply so mething t hat was t o o ne side, ou t side t he r egu lar st re am of t he t ra vel to and fr om t he eve nt and t he eve nt it se lf. It i s a

dif f i cul t que sti on w he the r con duc t of tha t ty pe , con duc t wh i ch i s n ot wrongful, which i s not aff irm ative ly unauthorized i

n the sen se that it's f

orbidden whi ch i s consi stent with the gen eral gui delin es to which

the student was subj ect wh ich ne ve r t he les s is en t ire ly vo lun t ar y o n t he pa r t o f t he st ud en t , it 's a diffic ult qu es t io n w he t he rco nd uc t o f t ha t ki nd o ug ht t o be co ve r ed un de rt he po licy. I t hink t he wo rd ing o f the po licy when you t ake all thr ee o f the pr ovisio ns t hat I r ead t og et her , p ar t icular ly the pr ovisio n having t o d o w ith co ver ed t ra vel and wh en i t b eg i n s a n d en ds , m

us t i n th i s i n sta n ce b e read to i

n cl ude w h at h appen ed to Mr. Re gan

be caus e he was

not dev i ati ng f rom th e requ i rem en ts of h i s su perv i sion. I sa y t ha t be ca us e it se ems cle ar an d t he de po sit io ns o f t he co ac he s s t r o ng ly sug ges t t hat fro m the s cho ol's s t andp oint , a s fro m the p ar ent s' st andp oint , t he scho ols c ons ider ed t he st ude nt t o be subjec t t o t he sc hoo l's sup er vision fro m the t ime the t rip be gins unt il the t rip e nds. If t he st ude nt deviat es fro m the1-05-1656

8

requirem ents [of] that supervi si on, then the student is absol utely on hi s or her own and wh atever happens i s I thin

k uni nsured. I don't thi

nk there's any question ab out th at. Bu t if t he st ud en t do es n't de via t e, t he n it se ems t o me t ha t a r ea so na ble per so n wo uld r ead t he po licy to say t hat so long as t he st ude nt is playing by the rules , the insurance cove

rage ought t o apply . That result i s not altogether free f rom doub t. Bu t appl y i ng the rul e that a n a m bi gui ty m us t be constru ed i n f av or of the in sured, it seem

s to me that that is the response wh ic h i s cal le d for here. So I w ill gr ant t he plaint iff

's mot ion fo r su mmary judgment and d eny the defendan t's motion for summ

ary j udgment." AN AL YSIS We rev ie w de novo the tri

al court's orders g ran tin g pl ai ntif f 's motion f or sum mary j udgm en t and den y i ng d ef endan t's m otion f or sum mary j udgm en t. Cent ra l Illi

nois L ight Co . v. Hom e In su ran ceCo. , 213 I ll . 2d 141, 153 (200 4). T he construct ion of an i nsurance policy is a que sti on of l aw , wh i ch i s a l so s ub j ec t to de novo revi ew. Ce nt r al I llino is , 213 Ill . 2d at 153. "W h en con str ui n g th e l an gu ag e of an i n su ra n ce pol i cy , a cou rt' s pri mar y ob j ec ti v e is to ascertain and gi

ve eff ect t o t he i

ntentions of the part ies as ex pressed by the words o f the policy." Ce nt r al I llino is , 213 I ll . 2d at 153. "An in surance policy

, li ke any contr act, is to be constr ued as a whole , gi vi ng e f f ect to eve ry provision, if

possi bl e, b eca use i t mu st be ass um ed th at ev ery pro vi sion was i

ntended to serve a purpo se." Ce nt r al I llino is , 213 Ill . 2d at 153. "If the words
use d in t he po licy are clea r a nd una mbiguo us, t hey must be given t heir p lain, o rd inary, a nd popular meani

ng." Ce nt r al I llino is , 213 Ill . 2d at 153. "Ho wever, i f the words used i n the poli cy1-05-1656

9

ar e r ea so na bly su sc ep t ible t o mo r e t ha n o ne mea ning , t he y ar e a mbig uo us an d w ill be s t r ict ly constr ued against the drafter. " Ce nt r al I llino is , 213 Ill . 2d at 153. Defendan t co ntends on appeal that plain tiff is n ot covered under t he subj ect po li cy b ecause his inj ur y occ ur re d while pa rt icipat ing in unsup er vised r ecr eat ional ac t ivities and not dur ing "covered travel ." Defen

dant correct ly

notes that in order to obtain c overage i n the i nstant case, plai ntif f was required to est abl

ish hi s in jury occur red during "covered t ravel." As previously

noted , t he policy def

in es "covered t ravel" as f

ollows: " 'Co ver ed T ra vel' means t eam o r g ro up t ra vel by part icipant s in a Cov ered Ev en t: (a) di re ctl y to or f rom a C ov ered

Ev en t; (b) aut hor ized a nd pa id for or re imbursed by the Sp ons or ing Or ganiza t ion; and (c) supervised by

staff me mb ers or a design

ated
re pr ese nt at ive of t he Sp ons or ing Or ganiza t ion. Cov ere d Travel

be gi ns wi th d ep arti ng f rom the mee ti ng pl ac e f or suc h t ra vel and e nds u po n t he r elease of t he I nsur ed fr om t he Spons orin g Orga ni zation' s su

perv i sion." Defend ant asse rt s t hat t he r equ irement s include d in subs ect ions ( a) , ( b), and ( c) of t he above def in ition have not been sa

tisf ie d. Defen

dant fi rst contends, pursuant to subse ction (a), that pla int iff "w as no t inju r ed du r ing t r av el directly to or from a schedul ed baseb all ga

me or supervis ed pr ac t ice se ss io n" an d t hu s fa iled t o mee t t he firs t pr o ng o f t he ab o ve de finit io n. ( E mph as is in1-05-1656

10

or iginal.) T o s upp or t t his co nt ent ion, defend ant cite s dict ionar y definitions which de fine "d i rectl y " a s " [i ]n a di rect wa y wi thou t an y thi ng i nte rv en i ng " a nd "[i n] a di rect l i ne , wa y , or man n er ; strai gh t." Re l y i n g u pon th es e def i n i ti on s, de f en da n t con str ue s " cov ered tra v el " to r ef er to "th e p roc es s of

mov i n g di re ctl y (w i th out dev i ati on) to or f rom th e l oca ti on of an i n tercol l eg i ate game o r t eam pr act ice ses sion. " Bas ed u po n t his co nst ru ct ion, defend ant co nt ends t hat at t he t ime o f his in

jur y, p laint iff "w as no t en ga ge d in t ea m t r av el directly to or from a s ch ed ule d g ame or sup er vised p ra ct ice ses sion, " but ra t her "wa s injured , inde pend ent of t eam t ra vel, w hile diving in to the ocean o n a day

when no baseb all

games or team pract ice sess ions were scheduled." (Em phasi s i n ori gi na l .) W e re cogni

zetha t plai nti f f wa s n ot ph y si cal l y movi ng or b ei ng tran sp orted di rectl y to or from a gam e or pract ic e sessi

on at the time

he was i nj ured. We note, however, that t he polic y provisi on in question does n

ot state "covered tr avel " m eans team or gro up transportation dir ec t ly to or f rom a c ove red even t. Ra the r, that p rovi si

on d ef i ne s " covere d tra

ve l " i n p art a s te am

or group travel

dire ct ly to or fro m a co ver ed e vent . As p laintiff point s o ut in his brief, in to day's worl d trav el

i s n ot si m pl y l i m i ted to trans

portation, but a

l so en tai l s b ei ng a way f rom h ome f or a peri od of ti me an d i nc l udes meals an d lodgi ng as we l l acti vi tie s i nc i den t thereto. Indeed, we agree with pl ai ntif f' s asserti on that his

stay at the hotel an

d hi s use of the h

ot el faci li ties an d beach "[ we r e] all p ar t an d p ar ce l o f his t r av el d ire ct ly t o t he r ema ind er o f t he ga mes o n t he Flo r ida t r ip
an d [ we r e] in no wa y a d et o ur o rdiv er sio n fr o m his d es t ina t io n - t he r ema ining lo ca t io ns in Fl orida f or th e re st of

the trav el sche dul e." A cc ordi

ngl y , we con cl ude the re i s n o ge nu i ne i ss ueof mate rial fact t hat plaint iff

was enga ged in tea m or gr ou p t ra vel dire ct ly to or fro m a co ver ed e vent at t he t ime o f his inju ry.1-05-1656

11

De f en da nt n ex t con ten dstha t be ca us e St. A m br ose di d n ot pa y or re i m bu rs e p l ai nti f f f or hi s a i rf are , lodgi ng , m eal , an d e nte rtai nm en t ex pe ns es , th e s ec ond

pron g of the de f i ni ti on of
covere d tra

ve l , wh i ch req ui res tha t the trav el be "p ai d f or or re i m bu rs ed by " S t. A m br ose , wa s n

ot satisf ie d. The pr ovisio n in ques t ion st at es t hat " 'Co ver ed T ra vel' means t eam o r g ro up t ra vel by par t icipant s in a Co ver ed E vent *** (b) aut hor ized a nd pa id for or re imbursed by the S po nso ring Org an iza ti on. " W e f i nd tha t the re i s n o ge nu i ne i ss ueof material f ac t tha t St. A m br ose pai d f or the tea m or group tr

avel . W e re cogni

zetha t plai nti f f an d h i s te am mate s w ere

res pon si bl e f or rai si ng f unds suf f i cien t to cover the

cost of thei r ai rf are, h otel, a nd f ood. However, the

play ers did n ot keep the m

oney necess ary to pay f

or airfa re, hotel, and f

ood but , rather, t urned that money o ver t o C oa ch Ca llahan, w ho in t ur n sec ur ed g ro up r at es fo r t he t eam at t he ho t el and t he ai rl i ne . F urth erm ore, the un i ve rs i ty pai d the entr

y f ee f or th e tou rnam en t an d the c ost of trans portin g the play ers to an d f rom b ase ba l l gam es s chedul

ed du ri ng th e tourna men t. In ad dit io n, t he un ive r sit y pa id t he co st o f t r an sp o r t ing t he t ea m t o an d fr o m Mid wa y air po r t in Chicago and t he cost o f transport in g the t eam to and from the Miam i ai rpo rt. In li

ght o f these fact s and circu msta nces , w e co nclude t her e is no genu ine issue o f mate rial fact t hat t he t eam's trave l waspai d f or by St. Am bros e. De fen da nt as se r t s in h is r ep ly br ief t ha t "s o me o f t he st ud en t s p aid fo rt he ir s pr ing t r ip with thei r personal s avi

ngs or wi th money obtaine d from

their paren

ts." The port ion of

Coach Calla han's deposi

tion ci ted by defen dant in support o f this proposition does not refl ect that plai ntif f or his teammates paid f

or t hei r tr ip to Florida with personal sav in gs or with t hei

r parent s'
m one y . Ra the r, C oac h C al

l ah an si m pl y sta ted i n h i s dep osi ti on th at p are nts ha ve on oc ca si

on1-05-1656

12

hel ped pl ay ers pay for base bal l tri ps and ex pla in ed that it is

only in very rare cases that pl ay

ers do
n ot rai se th e req ui si te a moun t. De f en da nt n ex t con ten dstha t "[p l ai nti f f 's ] s wi m m i ng an d di vi ng ac ti vi ti eswere n

ot su pe rvise d b y St
. Ambr o se " a nd t hu s d id n o t sa t isfy t he po licy's r eq uir eme nt t ha t "c o ve r ed t r av el" be "supe rvi sed by staff me mb ers or a design

ated representative." Def endan t argues that "[b]ecause [pl

ai ntif f] was f ree to pur sue recreational activ ities of h is choosin g on the team' s day
o ff, an d b ec au se [ his] sw imming a nd div ing ac t ivit ies o n t ha t da y, in fac t , we r e n o t co nd uc t ed in t he pr ese nce o r u nder t he su per vision o f St . Ambro se's c oa ching st aff, [ plaint iff 's] s wimmi

ng and div ing inju ry ca nno t be co nst rue d a s fa lling w it hin t he At hle t ics Po licy's 'C o ve r ed T r av el' pro vi sion." The poli cy provisi on in question states that "covered travel" me ans team or gro up travel "supervised b

y staff mem bers or a designated rep resentat iv e of the Spo nsoring Organi zation." Th e p ol i cy

ne i the r de f i ne s " su pe rvi se " n or qual i f i esi n a ny wa y the ty peor am oun t of su pe rvi si on that m ust b e provi ded. Th

e f i na l provision of

the def i ni tion of " cove red trav el " does , however, util iz e the word "supervi si on," and accordi ngl y we fi nd i t helpf ul to review that provisi

on. See Ce nt r al I llino is , 21 3 I l l . 2d at 1 53 (w

h en con str ui n g a n i n su ra n ce pol i cy , w e a reto gi v e e f f ec t to each provi si on, if

possible , as it m

ust be assum

ed that the parties to t he polic y i ntended each provision to serv

e a pu rpose). Th at p rovi si

on s tate s c ove red trav el "b eg i ns wi th d ep arti ng f rom t he meet ing place for suc h t ra vel and e nds u po n t he r elease of t he insur ed fr om t he Sp ons or ing Org an iza ti on' s s upe rvi si on. " Th e p rovi si on l i nks th e d ura ti on of the trav el to the pre senc e or absen ce of superv

is ion a nd thus ref

le cts an i ntent that t he superv

is ion provi

ded be conti

nuous f rom th e b egi nn i ng of the trav el unti l the e nd of the trav el
.1-05-1656

13

In th e i n sta n t ca se , the c oach es

com m un i ca ted ru l es f or th e b en ef i t of th e p l ay er s' saf ety
an d in fo rmed pla yer s t ha t br ea kin g t ho se rule s w o uld su bje ct t he m t o dis cip line a nd po t en t ially pre cl ude the m f rom pl ay i ng i n s ch ed uled ga mes . A s p l ai

nti f f poi nts out i n h i s res pon se br i ef on appe al, the p l ay

er s w ere s ub j ec t to the c oach es ' di

re cti on s a s to wh

ere th ey ate , w h ere th ey sl ep t,
and where they

wen t outsi de of

the b ase ba l l f i elds or the

hotel and area i m medi atel y around i t. The dep os itio n t est imony of plaint iff and As sist ant Co ach H unt ley reflect s t hat st eps wer e t ake n, suc h as be d che cks , t o e nsur e co mpliance wit h t hos e r ules. Plaint iff 's de po sitio n t est imony
re flect s t hat he wa s aw ar e o f the se r ules a nd t hat he wa s ac t ing in acco rd ance wit h t hem at t he ti me h e s us tai n ed h i s i n j ur y . We b el i ev e th at th e a rti cul ati on of th es e r ul es an d th e step s ta ken to ensure that they

were fol lowed were consi

stent with the ty

pe of superv

is ion i ntended b y the policy provisi on in question. Ac cordingl

y, we conc lude

that plai ntif f' s compl ia nce wi th those rules de mo nst r at es t he r e is no ge nu ine iss ue o f mat er ial fa ct t ha t his t r av el a ct ivit ies at t he t ime o f his i nj ury were supe rvised by the St. A m bros e coachi

ng s taf f
. In su ppor t of i ts c onte nti on th at p l ai nti f f 's trav el wa s n ot be i ng su pe rvi se d a

t the ti me of his inj ur y, de fendant emphas izes Co ach C allahan's d epo sitio n t est imony tha t t her e we re not any rule s o rr es t r ict io ns a s t o wh er e p laye r s c o uld go o n t he "o ff da y" a nd t ha t pla yer s w er e b as ica lly f ree to do whatev er the

y wan ted. We are

m i ndf ul of th i s testi mony by Coach Cal l ahan . Howev

er, we em phasi ze that he provi ded th i s testi mony af ter di scu ssi

ng th e rul es to wh i ch play ers were subjec t t hro ugho ut t he t rip. Tho se r ules, as p re viou sly discuss ed, allowe d player s t o r emain in the
ar ea a djace nt t o t he ho t el, includ ing t he bea ch ar ea a djace nt t o t he ho t el, w itho ut not ify ing t he coaches of thei

r speci fi c whereab out s, but required pl ay ers to not if

y one of the coaches i

f they pl an n ed to l ea v e th e a re a a rou n d th e h otel an d p roh i b i ted pl ay er s f rom l ea v i n g th at a re a wi th out a1-05-1656

14

bu dd y. As pr ev io us ly no t ed , pl ain t iff w as in c o mp lian ce wit h t ho se rul es at t he t ime o f his inju ry. As a f in al m att er, we no te t hat defendant contends t hat "covered t ravel" contempl ates a se pa r at e c o ve r ag e e va lua t io n fo rea ch se gme nt o f t ea m t r av el a nd ar gu es t ha t pla int iff's an alys is "unr eas ona bly assumes t hat Co ver ed T ra vel must be a s ingle all-enco mpassing event ." Defend ant reasons that plai

ntif f "f undam entally dis to rts Covered Travel i

nto a pro vi si on that creates 24- hou r- a- day co mpre hensive ac cident medical exp ense co ver age dur ing t he ent ire Flo rida t rip" a nd
ma in tains that "[a]ny i

nj ury s ustain ed durin g the spri ng break tri

p necess aril

y would f all un der [p l ai n ti f f ' s] ex pa n si v e n oti on of Cov ered Tra v el ." A cc ordi

n g to def en da n t, p l ai n ti f f "f ai l s to rec ogn izetha t covera gemay ex ten d to c erta i n s egmen ts of trav el , but not to othe

r s egmen ts of travel, depen

din g upon whether the three prongs of the de fi ni tion of Covered Travel

have been satisfi ed for each leg of team travel." We r eje ct de fen da nt 's c o nt en t io n t ha t de t er mining wh at co nst it ut es "c o ve r ed t r av el"
re quir es br eak ing do wn t he t eam's t rip t o F lor ida int o va rio us s egment s. T he po licy i ssu ed by de fen da nt do es no t pr o vid e fo rsu ch se gme nt at io n by s t at ing , fo rex amp le, t ha t "c o ve r ed t r av el" ends wh en the pl ay ers get off the pl

ane or bus. Rather, the poli cy's provi si on stating that "co ver ed t ra vel" "beg ins with d epa rt ing fro m the mee t ing place for suc h t ra vel and e nds u po n t he
re l ea se of th e i n su re d f rom th e S ponsor

i n g O rg an iza ti on ' s s up er v i si on " ref l ec ts th at th e p ar ti es to th e p oli cy i n ten de d c ov erag e to ex i st d

uri n g th e en ti retri p p rov i de d th at th e req ui re men ts included in subpa ra gr aphs (a ), (b) , a nd ( c) of t he de fini t ion o f "co ver ed t ra vel" we re sat isfied. As di scu sse d ab ove, i

n the i nstant ca se a

l l three of th ose req ui rem en ts were sati sf i ed. Lastly , we note t hat our construct ion of "covered travel " does not create 24-hour -a-day comprehe nsi ve acci dent me dic al

expense coverage duri

ng the en tire Fl orida trip or provide that1-05-1656

15

any injury sust ained d ur ing t he t rip w ill nece ssar ily

be co ver ed. Plaint iff

was not enga ged in any typ e of f roli c an d detour i n v i ola tion of the rul es a rtic ulated b y the St. A m bros e coachi

ng s taf f
. Rat her , a s alre ady no t ed, he wa s ac t ing subjec t t o t he su per vision o f the St . Ambro se c oa ching staf f and i n c omp l i ance wi

th the coach i ng s taf f 's team rules. CONCLUSION Based on the f

orego in g reasons, we concl

ude that plai

ntif f was covered under the sub

je ct po licy at t he t ime he sust ained his injury. Acco rd ingly, we a ffi rm t he t rial co ur t or der gr ant ing plaint iff 's mot ion fo r su mmary judgment , a nd we affirm the t rial co ur t or der denying de fendant 's
m oti on f or sum mar y j udgm en t. Af fi rmed. TULL Y an d GA LL AG HER, J J., con cur.