IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

CARDELLI ENTERPRISE, L.L.C., )

individually and on behalf of others )

similarly situated, )

)

 Plaintiff, ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

)

 v. )

)

SOCIETY INSURANCE, )

a mutual company )

)

 Defendant )

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Plaintiff Cardelli Enterprise, L.L.C. (“Cardelli”) individually and on behalf of all other 

members of the class defined herein (collectively, the “Class”), brings this Class Action 

Complaint against Defendant Society Insurance, a mutual company (“Defendant” or “Society 

Insurance”), and in support thereof states:

INTRODUCTION

1. Plaintiff is the owner and operator of Enzo & Lucia Italian restaurant and bar in 

historic downtown Long Grove, Illinois, which was forced, by recent orders issued by the 

Governor of the State of Illinois, to suspend all on-premises dining and beverage consumption 

operations – through no fault of its own – as part of the State’s efforts to slow the spread of the 

global COVID-19 pandemic. The closures mandated by these government orders poses an 

existential threat to Plaintiff’s business, which employs many Illinois residents. 

2. To protect its businesses from situations like these, which threaten the health, safety 

and livelihood of Plaintiff’s employees and customers due to factors wholly outside of its control, 

Plaintiff obtained business interruption insurance from Society Insurance. The Policy is an “allrisk” policy that provides broad coverage for losses caused by any cause unless expressly 

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 1 of 34 PageID #:1
excluded. The Policy does not exclude losses from viruses or pandemics. Thus, the all-risk Policy 

purchased by Plaintiff covers losses caused by viruses, such as COVID-19

3. On March 16, 2020, during the term of the policy issued by Society Insurance to 

Plaintiff, Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker issued Executive Order 2020-07 mandating that all 

restaurants and bars suspend all on-premises consumption of food and beverages due to the 

“ongoing spread of COVID-19 and the danger the virus poses to the public’s health and 

wellness[.]” Thereafter, Governor Pritzker issued additional COVID-19 Executive Orders that 

extended these restrictions into the future, with the current Executive Order 2020-33 extending 

this suspension through May 29, 2020. 

4. Due to the global COVID-19 pandemic, and in compliance with the resulting civil 

action orders issued by Governor Pritzker, Plaintiff was forced to close all on-premises indoor 

and outdoor dining and beverage consumption areas to the general public as part of the State of 

Illinois’ efforts to combat the spread of COVID-19, and in order to prevent further damage and 

minimize the suspension of its business. As a result, Plaintiff has suffered substantial lost 

income, incurred extra expenses to minimize the suspension of its business, and has been forced 

to furlough or lay off a substantial number of its workers. 

5. In blatant breach of its insurance obligations that it voluntarily undertook in 

exchange for Plaintiff’s premium payments, Society Insurance has denied Plaintiff’s claims 

arising from the COVID-19 pandemic and resulting State of Illinois Civil Action Orders

mandating the suspension of its ordinary business operations. 

6. As a result, Plaintiffs now bring this action against Society Insurance for its failure 

to honor its contractual obligations under insurance policy that it issued to Plaintiff, that provides

coverage for, among other things, losses incurred due to the “necessary suspension” of its 

business operations, including when such a suspension is due to a government order.

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 2 of 34 PageID #:2
7. Furthermore, despite Society Insurance’s express promise to cover and pay for the 

Plaintiff’s business interruption losses, Society Insurance has issued blanket denials to Plaintiff 

and other similarly situated Illinois businesses related to COVID-19 and the civil action orders of 

the Governor, without first conducting any meaningful coverage investigation, let alone a 

“reasonable investigation based on all available information” as required under Illinois law.

8. In fact, on March 16, 2020, before the Plaintiff had even submitted its insurance 

claim related to these losses, Society Insurance circulated a memorandum from its CEO Rick 

Parks to Society’s “agency partners,” acknowledging that States, such as Illinois, had “taken 

steps to limit operations of certain businesses,” but prospectively concluding that Society 

Insurance’s policies would likely not provide coverage for losses due to a “governmental 

imposed shutdown due to COVID-19 (coronavirus).” A copy of this memorandum is attached 

hereto as Exhibit A.

9. To the extent Society Insurance has provided any reason to Plaintiff for its 

categorical assertion that Plaintiff’s losses are not covered, it is based on the assertion that, 

among other things, the “actual or alleged presence of the coronavirus,” which led to the 

Governor’s Civil Action Orders that suspended Plaintiff’s business operations, does not 

constitute a “Covered Cause of Loss” under the Policy. See April 22, 2020 letter attached here as 

Exhibit B. 

10. But Society Insurance’s conclusory statement that the actual or alleged presence of 

a substance like COVID-19 does not result in property damage is contrary to the law in Illinois. 

Illinois courts have consistently held that the presence of a dangerous substance in a property 

constitutes “physical loss or damage.” See, e.g., Bd. of Educ. of Twp. High Sch. Dist. No. 211 v. 

Int’l Ins. Co., 720 N.E.2d 622, 625-26 (Ill. Ct. App. 1999), as modified on denial of reh’g (Dec. 

3, 1999).

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 3 of 34 PageID #:3
11. Moreover, unlike many commercial property policies available in the market, the 

policies sold by Society Insurance do not include an exclusion for loss caused by any virus. 

Thus, Plaintiff reasonably expected that the insurance it purchased from Society Insurance 

included coverage for property damage and business interruption losses caused by viruses like 

COVID-19.

12. If Society Insurance had wanted to exclude viruses or pandemic-related losses 

under the Plaintiff’s policy – as many other insurers have done in other policies – it easily could

have done so on the front-end with an express exclusion of coverage. Instead, Society Insurance 

waited until after it collected Plaintiff’s premium payment, and after the global COVID-19 

pandemic and the resulting civil action orders caused catastrophic business losses to Plaintiff, to 

try and limit its exposure on the back-end through its erroneous assertion that the presence of the 

coronavirus is not “physical loss” and therefore is not a Covered Cause of Loss under the policy.

13. The fact that the insurance industry has created specific exclusions for viruses and 

pandemic-related losses under similar commercial property policies undermines Society 

Insurance’s assertion that the presence of a virus, like COVID-19, does not cause “physical loss

of or damage to” property. Indeed, if a virus could never result in a “physical loss” or “damage”

to property, there would be no need for such an exclusion. Moreover, Society Insurance ignores 

the clear fact that its policy promised to provide coverage for losses incurred due to government 

actions “taken in response to dangerous physical conditions,” even if those dangerous physical 

conditions cause damage to property at locations other than those insured under their policies.

14. Society Insurance’s wholesale, cursory coverage denials are arbitrary and 

unreasonable, and inconsistent with the facts and plain language of the policies it issued. The 

coverage denials appear to be driven by Society Insurance’s desire to preempt its own financial 

exposure to the global COVID-19 pandemic, rather than to initiate, as Society is obligate to do, a 

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 4 of 34 PageID #:4
full and fair investigation of the claims and a careful review of the policies they sold to Plaintiff 

in exchange for valuable premiums.

15. To right the wrongs committed by the Defendant, Plaintiff brings this action 

against Defendant, on its behalf and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, for a 

declaratory judgment establishing that they are entitled to receive the benefit of the insurance 

coverage they purchased, for breach of Defendant’s contract obligations in the insurance policy 

to indemnify and pay for, among other things, loss of business income and extra expenses 

incurred, and for bad faith claims handling under Illinois law, including 215 ILCS 5/155. 

PARTIES

16. Plaintiff Cardelli Enterprise, L.L.C. (“Cardelli”) is an Illinois limited liability 

company. The members of Cardelli are Glenn Cardelli and Renata Cardelli, both of whom are 

Illinois citizens. Cardelli owns and operates Enzo & Lucia Italian restaurant and bar, located at 

343 Old McHenry Road, Long Grove, Illinois, which is its principal place of business.

17. Defendant Society Insurance, a mutual company (“Society”) is an insurance 

company incorporated under the laws of the State of Wisconsin, and it maintains a principal place of

business in Fond du Lac, Wisconsin. At all relevant times, Society has been, and is currently, 

authorized to write, sell, and issue insurance policies to businesses in Illinois, and it has been, 

and is currently, engaged in conducting and transacting business in the State of Illinois by selling 

and issuing insurance policies to businesses in Illinois, such as Plaintiff. . 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

18. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) 

because there is complete diversity between the parties and the amount in controversy exceeds 

$75,000, exclusive of interest and costs.

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 5 of 34 PageID #:5
19. This Court also has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(2) 

because (i) at least one member of the Class is a citizen of a different state than any Defendant, 

(ii) the amount in controversy exceeds $5,000,000, exclusive of interests and costs, and (iii) none 

of the exceptions under that section apply to this case

20. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant pursuant to the Illinois “long 

arm statute,” 735 ILCS 5/2-209, because Defendant has submitted to jurisdiction in this state by: 

(a) transacting business in Illinois; (b) contracting to insure a person, property, or risk located 

within Illinois at the time of contracting; and (c) making a contract substantially connected with 

Illinois. 735 ILCS 5/2-209(1), 2-209(4), 2-209(7). Furthermore, Defendant exercises 

substantial, systematic and continuous contacts with Illinois by doing business in Illinois, serving 

insureds in Illinois, and seeking additional business in Illinois.

21. This Court has jurisdiction to grant declaratory relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2201 

because an actual controversy exists between the parties as to their respective rights and 

obligations under the Policy with respect to the loss of business income and extra expense arising 

from the events detailed in this Complaint.

22. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) because a 

substantial part of the events giving rise to Plaintiff’s claims occurred within the Northern 

District of Illinois

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The Insured Business

23. Through Cardelli Enterprise, L.L.C., Renata and Glenn Cardelli have owned and 

operated Enzo & Lucia Italian restaurant and bar since 2007. Over the years, Glenn, Renata and 

their staff have worked tirelessly to ensure a consistently high quality dining and entertainment 

experience that has allowed Enzo & Lucia to achieve an excellent reputation in the Chicagoland 

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 6 of 34 PageID #:6
area and to be a consistently profitable business

24. Until the devastating events and occurrences described herein, Enzo & Lucia 

offered a full menu of food and beverages for on-premises consumption, with both indoor and 

outdoor private dining, and a small bar area. Enzo & Lucia’s upper dining room seats 100 people, 

serving lunch and dinner seven days per week. Its lower level dining seats 75 people and is used 

for private events, such as weddings, holiday celebrations and graduation parties. The restaurant’s 

outdoor dining area seats 64 people. 

The Society Insurance All-Risk Policy

25. Society Insurance has engaged in the marketing and sale of its insurance policies in 

the State of Illinois since the 1990s.

1

26. In 2019, Society sold Plaintiff an “all-risk” insurance policy, known as a 

Businessowners Policy (No. BP15031255-4) with an effective date of coverage from October 26, 

2019 to October 26, 2020 (the “Policy”). A copy of the Policy is attached hereto as Exhibit C.

27. Society issued the Policy to Plaintiff at its principal place of business in Illinois.

28. At all relevant times, the Policy covered Enzo & Lucia’s restaurant and bar 

operations and premises at the address alleged above and in the Declarations page. Ex. C at 3.

29. Plaintiff has performed all of its obligations under the Policy, including, but not 

limited to, the payment of premiums to Defendant and the timely reporting of its claim.

30. The Policy has been in effect at all times since October 26, 2019, without interruption.

31. The Policy consists of various policy forms, including but not limited to form 

number TBP2 05-15 (also referred to as form number TBP2 (05-15)), entitled “Businessowners 

Special Property Coverage Form” (hereinafter, the “Businessowners Form”). See Exhibit C at 

33-64.

 

1

 See e.g., Society Insurance webinar for Illinois Agents, 2/24/2020 “Society Sizzle: Ease of Doing 

Business with Society Insurance ǀ Illinois Agents”. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktz2e0JtzE&feature=youtu.be

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 7 of 34 PageID #:7
32. Section A of the Businessowners Form provides coverage to Plaintiff for property 

damage whereby Society Insurance agreed to “pay for direct physical loss of or damage to

Covered Property at the premises described in the Declarations caused by or resulting from any 

Covered Cause of Loss.” See Ex. C, Businessowners Form at § A (hereinafter, BF § __.)

33. The Policy defines “Covered Cause of Loss” as “Direct Physical Loss unless the 

loss is excluded or limited under this coverage form.” See Ex. C, BF § A.3. The Policy does not 

contain any additional definition of the phrase “Covered Cause of Loss.”

34. Unlike many commercial property insurance policies available on the market, the 

Policy that Society Insurance sold to Plaintiff is an “all-risk” Policy, meaning that the Policy 

covers all risks and losses unless specifically excluded in the Policy. 

35. The Policy does not exclude risks or losses from viruses, epidemics or pandemics, 

such as coronaviruses like COVID-19. Thus, Plaintiff reasonably expected that the Policy it 

purchased from Defendant included coverage for physical loss of or damage to its premises and 

business interruption losses caused by viruses like COVID-19.

36. Losses due to COVID-19 are a Covered Cause of Loss under the Businessowners 

Form.

37. In addition to coverage for physical loss or damage to property, Society Insurance 

also agreed to “pay for the actual loss of Business Income” sustained by Plaintiff “due to the 

necessary suspension” of Plaintiff’s “operations” during the period of business interruption

“caused by direct physical loss of or damage to covered property” at the Plaintiff’s insured 

premises. See Ex. C, BF § A.5.g.(1)(a).

38. In the Policy, “suspension” means: (a) “[t]he partial slowdown or complete 

cessation of your business activities” or (b) “[t]hat a part or all of the described premises is 

rendered untenantable if coverage for Business Income applies.” See Ex. C, BF § A.5.g.(3)(a) and 

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 8 of 34 PageID #:8
(3)(b).

39. In the Policy, “operations” means Plaintiff’s “business activities occurring at the 

described premises.” See Ex. C, BF § H.11.

40. In the Policy, “Business Income” is defined in relevant part as: “Net Income (Net 

Profit or Loss before income taxes) that would have been earned or incurred if no physical loss or 

damage had occurred” plus “continuing necessary operating expenses incurred.” See Ex. C, BF § 

A.5.g.(1)(c)(ii) and (1)(c)(ii).

41. Defendant also promised to “pay necessary Extra Expense” Plaintiff incurs during 

the period of interruption that Plaintiff “would not have incurred if there had been no direct 

physical loss or damage to covered property at the described premises.” See Ex. C, BF § A.5.h.(1).

42. In the Policy, “Extra Expense” is defined in part as “expense incurred: (a) 

“[t]o avoid or minimize the suspension of business and to continue ‘operations’: (i) [a]t the 

described premises; or (ii) “[t]o minimize the suspension of business if [Plaintiff] cannot continue 

‘operations’”; or (c) to “[r]epair or replace any property[.]” See Ex. C, BF § A.5.h.(2).

43. The Policy also includes “Civil Authority” coverage, pursuant to which Defendant 

promised to pay for the loss of Business Income and necessary Extra Expense sustained by 

Plaintiff “caused by action of civil authority that prohibits access” to Plaintiff’s premises. See Ex. 

C, BF § A.5.k.

44. The “Civil Authority” coverage is triggered when (a) any non-excluded cause 

results in “damage to property other than property” at Plaintiff’s insured premises, (b) “[a]ccess to 

the area immediately surrounding the damaged property is prohibited by civil authority as a result 

of the damage, and the described premises are within the area”, and (c) the “action of civil 

authority is taken in response to dangerous physical conditions resulting from the damage or 

continuation of the Covered Cause of Loss that caused the damage”. See Ex. C, BF § A.5.k.

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 9 of 34 PageID #:9
45. Damage caused by COVID-19 and the related Civil Action Orders triggered the 

Business Income, Extra Expense and Civil Authority coverages in the Businessowners Form.

The Global COVID-19 Pandemic

46. For many years, the Center for Disease Control and the World Health 

Organization have warned the general public about the possibility of an airborne virus that could 

cause a global pandemic.

47. In 2018, the World Health Organization (“WHO”) issued a 260 page report 

titled “Managing epidemics – Key facts about major deadly diseases,” in which its Director 

General acknowledged that 2018 marked the 100th anniversary of Spanish flu, the deadliest 

outbreak in recorded history, in which upwards of 50 million people were killed. In opening 

remarks of the report, the Director General stated: “Thankfully, we have not seen a public health 

emergency on that scale since then. But we may at any time. Outbreaks are a fact of life, and the 

world remains vulnerable. We do not know where or when the next global pandemic will occur, 

but we do know that it will take a terrible toll, both on human life, and on the global economy.”2

48. Coronaviruses are a large family of viruses that can cause diseases in humans, 

including Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS).3

49. Human coronaviruses were first identified in the mid-1960s, starting with 

Human coronavirus 229E and OC43. New members of coronaviruses that infect humans were 

discovered in 2002 (MERS), 2003 (SARS), 2004 (NL63) and 2005 (HKU1).4

50. There are four main sub-groupings of coronaviruses: alpha, beta, gamma, and 

delta. The seven human coronaviruses that can infect people are (1) 229E (alpha coronavirus), 

 

2

 See https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/managing-epidemics-interactive.pdf.

3

 See https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/managing-epidemics-interactive.pdf at 152; 

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/faq.html#Coronavirus-Disease-2019-Basics.

4

 See e.g., https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3509683/ and 

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/mers/about/index.html.

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 10 of 34 PageID #:10
NL63 (alpha coronavirus), OC43 (beta coronavirus), HKU1 (beta coronavirus), MERS-CoV (the 

beta coronavirus that causes Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, or MERS), SARS-CoV (the 

beta coronavirus that causes severe acute respiratory syndrome, or SARS), and SARS-CoV-2 

(the novel coronavirus that causes coronavirus disease 2019, also known as COVID-19).5 

Covid-19 is a betacoronavirus.6

51. A pandemic is the global outbreak of disease. Pandemics happen when a new 

virus emerges to infect people and can spread between people sustainably. Because there is little 

to no pre-existing immunity against the new virus, it spreads worldwide.7

52. On January 30, 2020, the Director General of the WHO declared the 2019 CoV-2 

outbreak a “Public Health Emergency of International Concern.”8

53. On February 11th, 2020, the Director General of the WHO named the disease 

caused by the SARS-CoV-2 as “COVID-19”.9

54. On March 11, 2020, the Director General of the WHO declared the COVID-19

outbreak a global pandemic stating, in part, that WHO is “deeply concerned both by the alarming 

levels of spread and severity, and by the alarming levels of inaction. We have therefore made the 

assessment that COVID-19 can be characterized as a pandemic.”10

55. As this Court recently recognized, COVID-19 “is highly contagious and easily 

transferable.” Elim Romanian Pentecostal Church v. Pritzker, No. 20 C 2782, 2020 U.S. Dist.

 

5

 See https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/types.html.

6

 See https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/faq.html#Coronavirus-Disease-2019-Basics.

7

 See https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/casesupdates/summary.html#:~:text=A%20pandemic%20is%20a%20global,pandemic%20by%20the%2

0WHO.

8

 See https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/30-01-2020-statement-on-the-second-meeting-of-theinternational-health-regulations-(2005)-emergency-committee-regarding-the-outbreak-of-novelcoronavirus-(2019-ncov).

9

 See https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/8/2690/htm.

10 See https://www.who.int/dg/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-themedia-briefing-on-covid-19---11-march-2020.

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 11 of 34 PageID #:11
LEXIS 84348, *1-2 (N.D. Ill. May 13, 2020) (finding that “Illinois, the nation, and the world are 

in the grip of a deadly pandemic the likes of which haven’t been experienced in more than a 

century.”).

56. COVID-19 has spread rapidly and continues to spread across Illinois, the United

States and the globe.

57. On March 11, 2020, WHO reported that there were more than 118,000 cases of 

COVID-19 in 114 countries.11

58. By May 21, 2020, WHO reported over 4.89 million global confirmed cases of 

COVID-19, including over 323,000 deaths.

59. By May 21, 2020, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”)

reported over 1.5 million confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the United States, including over 

93,000 deaths.

60. COVID-19 is a physical substance and an organic human pathogen. A human 

pathogen is a pathogen that causes disease in humans.

61. Covid-19 has a crown-like appearance under an electron microscope because of 

glycoprotein spikes on its envelope. Among the functions of the structural proteins, the envelope 

has a crucial role in virus pathogenicity as it promotes viral assembly and release.12

62. The clinical features of COVID-19 vary from asymptomatic forms to fatal 

conditions of severe respiratory failure that requires ventilation and support in an intensive care 

unit (ICU).

13

63. No vaccine is currently available for COVID-19 and understanding its 

 

11

 See https://www.who.int/dg/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-themedia-briefing-on-covid-19---11-march-2020.

12

 See https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/8/2690.

13

 See https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/8/2690.

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 12 of 34 PageID #:12
complexities is ongoing.14

64. According to the CDC, the incubation period (the time from exposure to 

development of symptoms) of COVID-19 ranges from 2–14 days.15

65. COVID-19 has several modes of transmission. According to WHO, COVID-19 

spreads primarily from person to person through small respiratory droplets from the nose or 

mouth, which are expelled when a person with COVID-19 coughs, sneezes, or speaks. People 

can catch COVID-19 if they breathe in these droplets from a person infected with the virus. 

COVID-19 physically transforms the air exposed to it and attaches itself to surfaces and

structures. For example, COVID-19 droplets can land on objects and surfaces around the person. 

People can become infected by touching these objects or surfaces, then touching their eyes, nose 

or mouth.16 

66. Some people infected with COVID-19 have no symptoms.17 

67. According to Harvard University, a person infected with COVID-19, even one 

with no symptoms, may emit aerosols when they talk or breathe. Aerosols are infectious viral 

particles that can float or drift around in the air for up to three hours. Another person can breathe 

in these aerosols and become infected with COVID-19. COVID-19 also can be spread from 

contact with infected surfaces or objects. For example, a person can get COVID-19 by touching a 

surface or object that has the virus on it and then touching their own mouth, nose, or possibly 

their eyes.

18

68. Scientific studies have shown that contaminated “fomites” (surfaces or objects) 

play a key role in the spread of viral infections and that such viruses can survive fomites for 

extended periods of time. Fomites consist of both porous and nonporous surfaces or objects that 

 

14 See https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/8/2690.

15 See https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/faq.html#COVID-19-Risk.

16 See https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/q-a-coronaviruses.

17 See https://www.health.harvard.edu/diseases-and-conditions/covid-19-basics.

18 See https://www.health.harvard.edu/diseases-and-conditions/covid-19-basics.

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 13 of 34 PageID #:13
can become contaminated with pathogenic microorganisms and serve as vehicles in transmission. 

Fomites can become contaminated with a viruses by direct contact with body secretions or fluid, 

contact with soiled hands, contact with aerosolized virus (large droplet spread) generated via 

talking, sneezing, coughing or contact with airborne virus that settles after disturbance of a 

contaminated fomite (i.e., shaking a contaminated blanket). Once a fomite is contaminated, the 

transfer of infectious virus may readily occur between inanimate and animate objects, or vice 

versa, and between two separate fomites (if brought together).19

69. A recent study by the National Institutes of Health, CDC, UCLA and Princeton 

University scientists in The New England Journal of Medicine also reports that COVID-19 can 

attach itself to contaminated objects and surfaces for long periods of time. The study found that 

COVID-19 was detectable in aerosols for up to three hours, up to four hours on copper, up to 24 

hours on cardboard and up to two to three days on plastic and stainless steel. According to the 

study, people may acquire COVID-19 through the air and after touching contaminated objects.20

All of these materials are used in several industries, including, but not limited to, restaurants that 

prepare and serve food to the general public, such as Plaintiff.

70. On March 27, 2020, the CDC released a report entitled “Public Health

Responses to COVID-19 Outbreaks on Cruise Ships -Worldwide, February - March 2020.”21

The report detailed that during this time frame, COVID- 19 outbreaks associated with three 

different cruise ship voyages caused over 800 confirmed cases and 10 deaths. Id. The report 

observed that COVID-19 was identified on a variety of surfaces in cabins of both symptomatic 

and asymptomatic infected passengers up to seventeen (17) days after cabins were vacated on the 

cruise line, but before disinfection procedures had been conducted. Id.

 

19 See https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1828811/.

20 See Neeltje van Doremalen, Ph.D., et al., Aerosol and Surface Stability of SARS-CoV-2 as 

Compared with SARS-CoV-1, The New England Journal of Medicine (April 16, 2020), available at 

https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMc2004973?articleTools=true.

21 See https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6912e3.htm?s_cid=mm6912e3_w.

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 14 of 34 PageID #:14
71. A scientific study documented in the Journal of Hospital Infection found that 

human coronaviruses, such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV can persist on inanimate surfaces like 

metal, glass or plastic for up to nine (9) days.22

72. To date, tens of thousands of people in Illinois have been diagnosed with 

COVID- 19, and it is likely that hundreds of thousands (if not millions) more have been infected 

by COVID-19 but have not been diagnosed. While in some cases asymptomatic, COVID-19 is 

also known to cause severe and sometimes fatal respiratory failure. This, in addition to the 

highly contagious nature of COVID-19, renders any property exposed to the contagion unsafe 

and dangerous.

Federal Major Disaster Declarations Due to COVID-19

73. On March 13, 2020, United States President Donald J. Trump declared a 

nationwide emergency related to COVID-19. 

74. On March 26, 2020, President Trump approved a federal major disaster 

declaration for the State of Illinois. He later approved federal major disaster declarations for the 

surrounding states of Indiana and Wisconsin on April 3 and April 4, 2020, respectively.

75. By April 11, 2020, President Trump had approved major disaster declarations for 

all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and four U.S. territories due to COVID-19. On 

information and belief, this was the first time in U.S. history that the President had declared a 

major disaster in all 50 States at once.

COVID-19 Cause of Direct Physical Loss and Damage

76. COVID-19 is a cause of real, direct physical loss and damage. In April 2020, the 

Pennsylvania Supreme Court found that the COVID-19 pandemic constitutes a “a natural disaster 

and a catastrophe of massive proportions“ namely because, like other identified natural disasters, 

it involves “substantial damage to property, hardship, suffering or possible loss of life.” Friends 

 

22 See https://www.journalofhospitalinfection.com/article/S0195-6701(20)30046-3/fulltext.

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 15 of 34 PageID #:15
of DeVito v. Wolf, No. 68 MM 2020, 2020 Pa. LEXIS 1987, at *33 (Pa. Apr. 13, 2020) (finding 

that the presence of COVID-19 in, and movement through the State of Pennsylvania, authorized 

the Governor to close the physical operations of businesses).

77. Since at least 2006, the insurance industry has recognized that the presence of

virus or disease can constitute physical damage to property. When preparing so-called “virus” 

exclusions to be placed in some insurance policies, but not others, the insurance industry drafting 

arm, the Insurance Services Office, circulated a statement to state insurance regulators that 

included the following: 

Disease-causing agents may render a product impure (change its quality or 

substance), or enable the spread of disease by their presence on interior 

building surfaces or the surfaces of personal property. When disease-causing 

viral or bacterial contamination occurs, potential claims involve the cost of 

replacement of property (for example, the milk), cost of decontamination (for 

example, interior building surfaces), and business interruption (time element) 

losses. Although building and personal property could arguably become 

contaminated (often temporarily) by such viruses and bacteria, the nature of 

the property itself would have a bearing on whether there is actual property 

damage. An allegation of property damage may be a point of disagreement in 

a particular case.

78. Governments authorities and public health officials throughout the United States 

have also acknowledged that the spread of COVID-19 causes direct physical loss and damage to 

property.

79. Losses caused by COVID-19 and the related orders issued by local, state, and 

federal authorities triggered the Business Income, Extra Expense and Civil Authority coverages 

under the Policy.

Civil Action Orders in Response to the Global Covid-19 Pandemic

80. The presence of COVID-19 has caused civil authorities throughout the country 

to issue orders requiring the suspension of business at a wide range of establishments, including

those with jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s businesses.

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 16 of 34 PageID #:16
81. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Governor of Illinois, J.B. Pritzker, 

has issued multiple Executive Orders and Proclamations pursuant to the authority vested in him 

by the Illinois Constitution and the laws of Illinois (the “Civil Action Orders”).

82. On March 9, 2020, Governor Pritzker declared all counties in the State of 

Illinois as a disaster area, specifically “in response to the outbreak of COVID-19” (the “First 

Disaster Proclamation”), which was effective for 30 days, through April 7, 2020.

83. On March 16, 2020, pursuant to the Illinois Emergency Management Agency 

Act, 20 ILCS 3305/1, et seq., Governor Pritzker issued Executive Order 2020-07 in response to 

COVID-19, specifically acknowledging that “the ongoing spread of COVID-19 and the danger 

the virus poses to the public’s health and wellness require the reduction of on-premises 

consumption of food and beverages[.]” As a result, the Governor ordered that: “Beginning 

March 16, 2020 at 9 p.m. through March 30, 2020, all businesses in the State of Illinois that 

offer food or beverages for on-premises consumption—including restaurants, bars, grocery 

stores and food halls—must suspend service for and may not permit on-premises 

consumption.” See Executive Order 2020-07 attached hereto as Exhibit D.

84. Executive Order 2020-07 also prohibited all public and private gatherings in 

the State of Illinois of 50 people or more commencing March 18, 2020 through the duration of 

the First Illinois Disaster Proclamation, including any “event or activity that brings together 50 

or more people in a single room or a single space at the same time.”

85. Executive Order 2020-07 specifically states, “the Illinois Department of Public

Health recommends Illinois residents avoid group dining in public settings, such as in bars 

and restaurants, which usually involves prolonged close social contact contrary to 

recommended practice for social distancing[.]” 

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 17 of 34 PageID #:17
86. Executive Order 2020-07 directed the Illinois State Police and other 

governmental agencies and commissions to enforce the provisions of that order. 

87. Executive Order 2020-07 was issued in direct response to the “ COVID-19 

outbreak” and the physical presence of COVID-19 on property throughout the State of Illinois. 

It specifically stated that the goal was to respond to the rapid spread of COVID-19 by 

restricting in-person interactions in environments with “frequently used surfaces in public 

settings, including bars and restaurants[.]” It also stated that the “ongoing spread of COVID-19 

and the danger the virus poses to the public’s health and wellness require the reduction of onpremises consumption of food and beverages.”

88. Executive Order 2020-07 further recognized frequently used surfaces in public 

settings, including bars and restaurants, posed a risk of exposure. Indeed, scientific studies have 

reported that some cleaning products or disinfectants are ineffective against viruses and can 

result in viral spread or cross-contamination of surfaces.23

89. On March 20, 2020, in response to the rapid spread of COVID-19 in the 

Greater Chicago Area and throughout Illinois, Governor Pritzker issued Executive Order 2020-

10,which, among other things: (1) directed Illinois residents to stay in their homes except when 

performing “essential” activities, (2) prohibited all public and private gatherings of 10 or more 

people unless exempted by the order, and (3) required “non-essential” businesses and 

operations in Illinois to cease operations. See Executive Order 2020-10 attached hereto as 

Exhibit E.

90. Pursuant to Executive Order 2020-10, all businesses in the State of Illinois that 

offer food or beverages for on-premises consumption, including restaurants and bars, were 

directed to continue suspending service for, and could not permit, on-premises consumption, 

through April 7, 2020. See Ex. E at § 1, ¶ 12(l). Executive Order 2020-10 confirmed that 

 

23 See https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1828811/.

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 18 of 34 PageID #:18
restaurants and other facilities that prepare and serve food could only do so “for consumption 

off-premises, through such means as in-house delivery, third-party delivery, drive-through, 

curbside pick-up, and carry-out.” Id. The order further empowered State and local law 

enforcement to enforce the order. 

91. On April 1, 2020, Governor Pritzker issued Executive Order 2020-18, in 

response to the fact that, “in a short period of time, COVID-19 has rapidly spread throughout 

Illinois”. The order continued and extended the prior Executive Orders of March 16 and March 

20 through April 30, 2020.” See Executive Order 2020-18 attached hereto as Exhibit F.

92. On April 1, 2020, Governor Pritzker also again declared all counties in the 

State of Illinois as a disaster area, specifically “in response to the exponential spread of 

COVID-19” throughout Illinois, finding that a “continuing disaster exists within the State of 

Illinois” and acknowledging that “the circumstances surrounding COVID-19 have resulted

in the occurrence and threat of widespread and severe damage, injury, and loss of life and 

property” (the “Second Disaster Proclamation”). This proclamation was effective 

immediately and remained in effect for 30 days thereafter, through April 30, 2020. See 4/1/20 

Proclamation attached hereto as Exhibit G.

93. On April 30, 2020, Governor Pritzker again declared all counties in the State 

of Illinois as a disaster area (the “Third Disaster Proclamation”) because, among other 

reasons, COVID-19 has “continued to spread rapidly[.]” This proclamation was effective 

immediately and was effective for 30 days. 

94. On April 30, 2020, Governor Pritzker issued Executive Order 2020-32, 

effective May 1, 2020, in response to the fact that COVID-19 has “continued to spread rapidly, 

requiring federal and State governments to take significant steps[.]” The April 30 Order 

prohibited “[a]ll public and private gatherings of any number of people occurring outside a 

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 19 of 34 PageID #:19
single household or living unit[.]” See Executive Order 2020-0 attached hereto as Exhibit H.

95. The April 30 Executive Order confirmed that restaurants and other facilities 

that prepare and serve food could only do so “for consumption off-premises, through such 

means as in-house delivery, third-party delivery, drive-through, curbside pick-up, and carryout. Importantly, the April 30 Order also acknowledged that the COVID-19 virus had the 

“propensity to physically impact surfaces and personal property” and, for this reason, food 

should not be eaten at the site where it is provided or at any other gathering site. The April 30

Order empowered State and local law enforcement to enforce the order. 

96. On April 30, 2020, Governor Pritzker issued Executive Order 2020-33, in 

response to the COVID-19 “emergency” that, among other things, reissued and extended the 

March 16 Order directing that “all businesses in the State of Illinois that offer food or 

beverages for on-premises consumption—including restaurants, bars, grocery stores and food 

halls—must suspend service for and may not permit on-premises consumption. This re-issued 

order extended the ban through May 29, 2020. See Executive Order 2020-33 attached hereto 

as Exhibit I.

97. Governor Pritzker’s aforementioned disaster proclamations and Executive 

Orders were in direct response to the continued and increasing presence of COVID-19 at 

property on or around Plaintiff’s premises.

98. Governor Pritzker issued the Disaster Proclamations and Executive Orders

(hereinafter, the “Civil Action Orders”) in direct response to the dangerous physical conditions

presented by the spread of COVID-19, and prohibited the public from accessing Plaintiff’s 

premises, thereby causing the necessary suspension of their operations and triggering the various 

coverages under the Policy. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 20 of 34 PageID #:20
99. The Civil Action Orders were made in direct response to the continued and 

increasing presence of COVID-19 on property or around Plaintiff’s premises.

100. The Civil Action Orders prohibited the public from accessing Plaintiff’s insured 

restaurant premises for on-premises consumption of food and beverages, thereby causing the 

necessary suspension of Plaintiff’s restaurant operations.

101. The Civil Action Orders are not laws or ordinances.

102. The Governor of the State of Illinois is a civil authority and/or governmental 

authority under the Policy.

103. Other governmental authorities and public health officials around the country 

have similarly acknowledged that the spread of COVID-19 causes direct physical loss of and/or 

damage to property. By way of example, and not limitation:

• The State of Indiana issued an executive order recognizing that 

COVID-19 has the “propensity to physically impact surfaces and 

personal property.” (emphasis added);

• The City of New York issued an emergency executive order in 

response to COVID-19 and the pandemic, in part “because the virus 

physically is causing property loss and damage.” (emphasis added);

• The City of Los Angeles issued an order in response to COVID-19 

“because, among other reasons, the COVID-19 virus can spread easily 

from person to person and it is physically causing property loss or 

damage due to its tendency to attach to surfaces for prolonged periods 

of time.” (emphasis added).

• Broward County, Florida issued an emergency order acknowledging 

that COVID-19 “is physically causing property damage.” (emphasis

added); and,

• The State of Colorado issued a public health order indicating that 

“COVID-19 ... physically contributes to property loss, 

contamination, and damage...” (Emphasis added).

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 21 of 34 PageID #:21
104. As these orders all recognize, the presence of people infected with or carrying 

COVID-19 particles throughout the state in places, like Plaintiff’s insured premises, where public 

gatherers typically socialize, eat, drink, or use for entertaining or other recreation renders those 

places unsafe and unusable. The Civil Action Orders were issued in direct response to these 

existing dangerous physical conditions.

Plaintiff’s Losses and Damages Related to COVID-19 and the Civil Action Orders

105. The presence of COVID-19 on or around Plaintiff’s premises has rendered the 

premises unsafe and unfit for its intended use and therefore caused direct physical loss of and or 

damage to the insured premises under the Policy.

106. The Civil Action Orders prohibited access to area immediately surrounding the 

Plaintiff’s insured premises, including properties owned and/or operated by other people and 

businesses that are subject to the Civil Action Orders. 

107. Plaintiff has sustained direct physical loss of, and/or damage to, Covered 

Property at the premises described in the Policy as a result of the presence of COVID-19

particles and the resulting Civil Action Orders.

108. The presence of COVID-19 caused direct physical loss of, and/or damage to, 

Plaintiff’s insured premises by, among other things, denying access to the premises, preventing 

customers from physically occupying the premises, causing the function of the premises to be 

nearly eliminated or destroyed, preventing Plaintiff from using the premises for its intended 

purposes, and/or causing the necessary suspension of business operations at the premises.

109. The Civil Action Orders prohibit the public from accessing Plaintiff’s insured 

premises described in the Policy, and the area immediately surrounding Covered Property in

response to dangerous physical conditions resulting from a Covered Cause of Loss, thereby 

causing the necessary suspension of its operations and triggering the Business Income, Extra 

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 22 of 34 PageID #:22
Expense and/or Civil Authority coverages under the Policy.

110. As a result of the rapid spread of COVID-19 and the Civil Action Orders, Plaintiff 

has lost Business Income, incurred Extra Expense, and incurred costs to clean and sanitize its 

insured premises, among other losses.

111. Plaintiff has suffered substantial Business Income losses and Extra Expense 

caused by: (i) a Covered Cause of Loss, (ii) the presence of COVID-19 at or around Plaintiff’s 

insured premises, and/or (iii) the Civil Action Orders which prohibit access to Plaintiff’s insured 

premises or the production of Plaintiff’s products for on-site consumption.

112. Plaintiff’s covered losses and damage under the Policy continues to accrue due to 

the COVID-19 pandemic and the Civil Action Orders.

Plaintiff’s Insurance Claim

113. On or about March 18, 2020, Plaintiff submitted a timely insurance claim to 

Society Insurance requesting payment for their business income losses and extra expenses 

promised under the Policy.

114. Within a few days after submitting the claim, one of Plaintiff’s member owners, 

Glenn Cardelli, called Society to follow up on the claim. The Society representative immediately 

informed Plaintiff that “every policy claim from all policyholders will be denied” and that 

Plaintiff “will be getting a registered letter” from Society denying the claim.

115. On April 22, 2020, Society Insurance sent Plaintiff a letter denying its claim for 

insurance coverage under the Policy, including, any claim under the Business Income, Extra 

Expense, and Civil Authority coverages in the Policy. See Exhibit B. In the letter to Plaintiff, 

Society Insurance denied that there was a Covered Cause of Loss, but did not identify any 

exclusion from coverage in the Policy. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 23 of 34 PageID #:23
116. Upon information and belief, Society Insurance has uniformly refused to 

provide Business Income, Extra Expense, Civil Authority, Contamination, or any other coverage 

to many, if not all, Illinois businesses that have submitted claims under the Businessowners Form

as a result of COVID-19 and the Civil Action Orders.

117. Defendant issued its denials or otherwise refused to respond to policyholder 

claims without first conducting a meaningful coverage investigation, let alone a “reasonable 

investigation based on all available information” as Illinois law requires.

118. Society did not conduct any interviews of Plaintiff’s owners or employees in 

relation to the claims.

119. Society did not visit the Plaintiff’s insured premises to investigate the claims.

120. In fact, on March 16, 2020, before Plaintiff’s had submitted their claim, Society 

Insurance sent a memorandum from its CEO Rick Parks to Society’s “agency partners,” 

acknowledging that states, such as Illinois, had “taken steps to limit operations of certain 

businesses,” but prospectively concluding that Society Insurance’s policies would likely not 

provide coverage for losses due to a “widespread governmental imposed shutdown due to 

COVID-19 (coronavirus).” See Exhibit A. 

121. Society Insurance based its denial, at least in part, on its assertion that the “actual 

or alleged presence of coronavirus,” does not constitute “direct physical loss or damage” under 

the Policy. However, Defendant’s statement that the alleged or actual presence of a substance like 

COVID-19 does not result in physical loss or damage to property is contrary to Illinois law: the 

presence of a dangerous substance in a property constitutes “physical loss or damage.” See, e.g., 

Bd. Of Educ. Of Twp. High Sch. Dist. No. 211 v. Int’l Ins. Co., 720 N.E.2d. 622, 625-26 (Ill. Ct. 

App. 1999), as modified on denial of reh’g (Dec. 3, 1999).

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 24 of 34 PageID #:24
122. Defendant could have excluded viruses and/or pandemic-related losses and 

damages under the Businessowners Form or another endorsement to the Policy, as other insurers 

do. In 2006, the Insurance Service Office (ISO) drafted a new endorsement, CP 01 40 07 06

(known as “Exclusion of Loss Due to Virus or Bacteria”), acknowledging that claims for business 

interruption losses would be filed under existing policy language for losses resulting from the 

presence of disease-causing agents. Endorsement CP 01 40 07 06, which other insurers have since 

incorporated in policies, provides, among other things, that an insurer “will not pay for loss or 

damage caused by or resulting from any virus, bacterium or other microorganism that induces or 

is capable of inducing physical distress, illness or disease.” Defendant did not include any 

language to this effect in the Businessowners Form.

123. Instead, Defendant waited until after it collected Plaintiff’s’ premiums, and after a 

pandemic and the resulting Civil Action Orders caused catastrophic business losses to Plaintiff’s, 

to attempt to limit its exposure on the back-end through its erroneous assertion that the presence 

of COVID-19 is not a “physical loss or damage” and is therefore not a covered cause of loss under 

its Policies.

124. That fact that the insurance industry has created and often uses specific exclusions 

for disease causing agents and/or pandemic-related losses under similar commercial property 

policies undermines Defendant’s claim that the presence of a virus, like COVID-19, does not 

cause “physical loss or damage” to property. Indeed, if a virus could not result in physical loss or 

damage to property, such specific exclusions for pandemic or virus-related losses would be

unnecessary.

125. Moreover, Defendant’s position ignores the coverage provided under the Policy’s 

“Civil Authority” provision for losses incurred due to governmental actions “taken in response to 

dangerous physical conditions,” even if those dangerous physical conditions cause damage to 

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 25 of 34 PageID #:25
property at locations other than those insured under the Policy.

126. Defendant’s wholesale, cursory denial of coverage is arbitrary, unreasonable, and 

inconsistent with the facts and plain language of the Policy. Defendant’s denials appeared to be 

driven by Defendant’s desire to reduce or extinguish its own financial exposure to the economic 

fallout caused by the COVID-19 crisis, rather than its obligation to initiate, as is its legal duty, a 

full and fair investigation of the claims and a careful review of the Policies it sold to Plaintiff’s in 

exchange for valuable premiums.

CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS

127. Class Definition: Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a),

23(b)(1), 23(b)(2), and 23(b)(3), Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of itself and the Class of 

similarly situated individuals and businesses, defined as follows:

 All persons and entities in the State of Illinois that: (a) are 

covered under a Society Insurance “all-risk” insurance policy

containing Businessowners Special Property Coverage Form 

number “TBP2 (05-15)”; (b) have sustained a loss of Business 

Income and/or Extra Expense under the policy as a result of 

COVID-19 and the Civil Action Orders; and (c) have been 

denied coverage for any such loss.

The above class is hereinafter referred to collectively as the “Class.” The following people are 

excluded from the Class: (1) any Judge or Magistrate presiding over this action and the members 

of their family; (2) Defendant, Defendant’s subsidiaries, parents, successors, predecessors, and 

any entity in which the Defendant or its parents have a controlling interest and their current or 

former employees, officers and directors; (3) persons who properly execute and file a timely 

request for exclusion from the Class; (4) persons whose claims in this matter have been finally 

adjudicated on the merits or otherwise released; (5) Plaintiff’s’ counsel and Defendant’s counsel; 

and (6) the legal representatives, successors, and assigns of any such excluded persons.

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 26 of 34 PageID #:26
128. Numerosity—Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a)(1). The members of 

each defined Class are so numerous that individual joinder of all Class members is

impracticable. While Plaintiff’s are informed and believe that there are thousands of 

members of each Class, the precise number of Class members is unknown to Plaintiff’s but

may be ascertained from Defendant’s books and records. Class members may be notified of 

the pendency of this action by recognized, Court- approved notice dissemination methods, 

which may include U.S. Mail, electronic mail, internet postings, and/or published notice.

129. Commonality and Predominance—Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 

23(a)(2) and 23(b)(3). This action involves common questions of law and fact, which 

predominate over any questions affecting only individual Class members, including, 

without limitation:

a. Whether Society Insurance issued all-risk insurance policies to 

Plaintiff and members of the Class in exchange for payment of 

premiums by Plaintiff and the Class members;

b. Whether Plaintiff and the Class suffered a covered loss based on 

the common policies issued to Plaintiff and members of the

Class;

c. Whether COVID-19 causes “direct physical loss of or damage 

to” property;

d. Whether Society Insurance wrongfully denied all claims based 

on COVID-19;

e. Whether Society Insurance’s Business Income coverage applies 

to a suspension of operations caused by COVID-19;

f. Whether the Civil Action Orders constitute “action[s] of civil

authority” under the Policy;

g. Whether Society Insurance’s Civil Authority coverage applies to 

a loss of Business Income caused by the Civil Action Orders 

requiring the suspension of operations as a result of COVID-19;

h. Whether Society Insurance’s Extra Expense coverage applies to 

expenses incurred caused by COVID-19;

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 27 of 34 PageID #:27
i. Whether Society Insurance has breached its contracts of 

insurance with Plaintiff and the Class by denying claims for 

coverage related to COVID-19 and the Civil Action Orders;

j. Whether Society Insurance has conducted a meaningful coverage 

investigation, let alone a “reasonable investigation based on all 

available information”; and,

k. Whether Plaintiff and the Class are entitled to an award of 

reasonable attorney fees, interest and costs.

130. Typicality—Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a)(3). Plaintiff’s claims are 

typical of the other Class members’ claims because Plaintiff and members of the Class purchased 

the same insurance coverage from Defendant containing identical language, Society Insurance 

denied their coverage claims related to COVID-19 and the Civil Action Orders, Plaintiff’s’ claims 

are based upon the same legal theories as those of the other Class members, and Plaintiff and the

other Class members sustained damages as a direct and proximate result of the same wrongful 

practices in which Defendant engaged.

131. .Adequacy of Representation—Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a)(4).

Plaintiff has and will continue to fairly and adequately represent and protect the interests of the 

Class and have retained counsel competent and experienced in complex litigation and class actions. 

Plaintiff has no interests that conflict with, or are antagonistic to, the interests of the other Class 

members, and Defendant has no defenses unique to Plaintiff. Plaintiff and its counsel are 

committed to vigorously prosecuting this action on behalf of the members of the Class, and they 

have the resources to do so. Neither Plaintiff nor their counsel have any interest adverse to those of 

the other members of the Class.

132. Inconsistent or Varying Adjudications and the Risk of Impediments to Other 

Class Members’ Interests—Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(1). Plaintiffs seek classwide adjudication as to the interpretation, and resultant scope, of Defendant’s the Businessowners 

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 28 of 34 PageID #:28
Form. The prosecution of separate actions by individual members of the Class would create an 

immediate risk of inconsistent or varying adjudications that would establish incompatible standards 

of conduct for the Defendant in evaluating future claims. Moreover, the adjudications sought by 

individual Plaintiffs could, as a practical matter, substantially impair or impede the ability of other

Class members, who are not partiesto this action, to protect their interests.

133. Declaratory and Injunctive Relief—Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2).

Defendant acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to Plaintiff’s and the other 

members of the Class, thereby making appropriate final injunctive relief and declaratory relief, as 

described below, with respect to the members of the Class.

134. Superiority—Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3). This class action is 

appropriate for certification because class proceedings are superior to all other available methods 

for the fair and efficient adjudication of this controversy and joinder of all members of the Class is 

impracticable. The prosecution of separate actions by individual members of the Class would 

impose heavy burdens upon the courts and would create a risk of inconsistent or varying 

adjudications of the questions of law and fact common to the Class. By contrast, a class action 

presents far fewer management difficulties and provides the benefits of single adjudication, 

economy of scale, and comprehensive supervision by a single court. Economies of time, effort, and 

expense will be fostered, and uniformity of decisions will be ensured.

COUNT I

DECLARATORY JUDGMENT

(Claim Brought on behalf of Plaintiff and the Class)

135. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the facts set forth in paragraphs 1-134 above as is 

fully set forth herein. 

136. Plaintiff’s Policy, as well as those of other members of the Class, are insurance 

contracts under which they paid Defendant premiums in exchange for Defendant’s promise to pay 

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 29 of 34 PageID #:29
Plaintiff’s and the Class’s losses for claims covered by the Policies.

137. Plaintiff and other members of the Class have complied with all applicable 

provisions of the Policies and/or those provisions have been waived by Society Insurance, or 

Society Insurance is estopped from asserting them.

138. Defendant has arbitrarily and without justification refused to reimburse Plaintiff’s

and members of the Class for any losses incurred by them in connection with the covered business 

losses and extra expenses related to the Civil Action Orders and the necessary interruption of their 

businesses stemming from COVID-19.

139. Society Insurance has denied claims related to COVID-19 on a uniform and classwide basis, without individual bases or investigations, such that the Court can render declaratory

judgment on a class-wide basis.

140. An actual case or controversy exists regarding the rights of the Plaintiff and the 

Class and Defendant’s obligations under their Policy to reimburse Plaintiff and the Class for the 

full amount of losses incurred by Plaintiff and the Class in connection with the Civil Action Orders

and the suspension of their businesses stemming from COVID-19.

141. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201, Plaintiff and the Class seek a declaratory judgement 

from this Court declaring the following:

a. The losses incurred by the Plaintiff and the Class in connection with the 

Civil Action Orders and the necessary interruption of their businesses 

stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic are insured losses under the 

Policy;

b. Society Insurance has waived any right it may have had to assert defenses to 

coverage or otherwise seek to bar or limit coverage for the losses sustained 

by the Plaintiff and the Class by issuing blanket coverage denials without 

conducting a claim investigation as required under Illinois law; and,

c. Society Insurance is obligated to pay for the full amount of the losses 

incurred and to be incurred by Plaintiff and the Class in connection with the 

covered losses related to the Civil Action Orders and the necessary 

interruption of their businesses stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 30 of 34 PageID #:30
COUNT II

BREACH OF CONTRACT

(Claim Brought on behalf of Plaintiff and the Class)

142. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the facts set forth in paragraphs 1-141 above as is 

fully set forth herein.

143. Plaintiff’s Policy, as well as those of other members of the Class, are insurance 

contracts under which they paid Defendant premiums in exchange for Defendant’s promise to pay 

for the losses sustained by Plaintiff and the Class for claims covered by the Policies.

144. Plaintiff and the Class have complied with all applicable provisions of the Policies

and/or those provisions have been waived by Society Insurance, or Society Insurance is estopped 

from asserting them, yet Defendant has failed to abide by it insurance coverage obligations 

pursuant to the Policies’ clear and unambiguous terms.

145. By denying coverage for any business losses and extra expense incurred by Plaintiff

and the Class in connection with the Civil Action Orders and the COVID-19 pandemic, Society 

Insurance has breached its coverage obligations under the Policies.

146. As a result of Defendant’s breaches of the policies, Plaintiff and the Class have 

sustained, and continue to sustain, substantial damages for which Defendant is liable, in an amount 

to be established at trial.

COUNT III

Statutory Claim Pursuant to 215 ILCS 5/155

(Claim Brought on behalf of Plaintiff and the Class)

147. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the facts set forth in paragraphs 1-146 above as is 

fully set forth herein.

148. Upon receipt of Plaintiff’s claims for coverage, Defendant immediately denied the 

claims without conducting any investigation, let alone a “reasonable investigation based on all 

available information” as required by Illinois law. See 215 ILCS 5/155, et seq.

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 31 of 34 PageID #:31
149. Upon information and belief, Defendant immediately and uniformly denied

coverage for losses sustained by Plaintiff and the Class without conducting any investigation, let 

alone a “reasonable investigation based on all available information” as required by Illinois law. See 

215 ILCS 5/154.6(h), et seq.

150. Defendant’s claim denials were vexatious and unreasonable.

151. Defendant’s denials constitute “improper claims practices” under Illinois law, 

namely Defendant’s (1) refusals to pay the claims of Plaintiff and the Class without conducting 

reasonable investigations based on all available information and (2) failure to provide reasonable 

and accurate explanations of the bases in its denials. See 215 ILCS 5/154.6(h) and 5/154.6(n).

152. Accordingly, pursuant to 215 ILCS 5/155, Plaintiff, on behalf of itself and the 

Class, request that, in addition to entering a judgement in favor of Plaintiff and the Class and 

against Defendant for the amount owed under the Policies at the time of judgement, the Court 

enter a judgement in favor of Plaintiff and the Class and against Defendant as part of the taxable 

costs in the action all attorney’s fees and costs, plus an amount equal to the greater of: (a) 60% of

the amount which the court or jury finds that Plaintiff and the Class are entitled to recover against

Society Insurance under the Policy, exclusive of costs (b) $60,000 per Class member; or (c) the

excess of the amount which the court or jury finds that Plaintiff and the Class are entitled to

recover, exclusive of costs, over the amount, if any, which the company offered to pay in

settlement of their claims prior to the action.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of the other members of the 

Class, respectfully pray that the Court:

1. Enter an order certifying the proposed Class, as defined above, with 

Plaintiff Cardelli Enterprise, L.L.C. as the representative of the Class, and 

appointing Plaintiff’s undersigned attorneys as Class Counsel;

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 32 of 34 PageID #:32
2. Enter a declaratory judgement on Count I of the Complaint in favor of 

Plaintiff and the Class, and against Defendant, declaring as follows:

a. The losses incurred by the Plaintiff and the Class in connection 

with the Civil Action Orders and the necessary interruption of their 

businesses stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic are insured 

losses under the Policy;

b. Society Insurance has waived any right it may have had to assert 

defenses to coverage or otherwise seek to bar or limit coverage for 

the losses sustained by the Plaintiff and the Class by issuing 

blanket coverage denials without conducting a claim investigation 

as required under Illinois law; and,

c. Society Insurance is obligated to pay for the full amount of the 

losses incurred and to be incurred by Plaintiff and the Class in 

connection with the covered losses related to the Civil Action 

Orders and the necessary interruption of their businesses stemming 

from the COVID-19 pandemic.

3. Enter a judgment on Count II of the Complaint in favor of Plaintiff and 

the Class, and against Defendant, and award damages for breach of 

contract in an amount to be established at trial;

4. Enter a judgment on Count III of the Complaint in favor of Plaintiff and 

the Class, and against Defendant, in the amount equal to the greater of to 

the greater of: (a) 60% of the amount which the court or jury finds that

Plaintiff and the Class are entitled to recover against Society Insurance

under the Policy, exclusive of costs (b) $60,000 per Class member; or (c)

the excess of the amount which the court or jury finds that Plaintiff and

the Class are entitled to recover, exclusive of costs, over the amount, if

any, which the company offered to pay in settlement of their claims prior

to the action;

5. Enter a judgement in favor of Plaintiff and the Class and against 

Defendant in an amount equal to all attorney’s fees and related costs 

incurred for the prosecution of this coverage action against Defendant, 

pursuant to 215 ILCS 5/155, to be established at the conclusion of this 

action;

6. Award prejudgment and post-judgment interest to Plaintiff and the Class

and against Defendant to be calculated according to law; and, 

7. Award Plaintiffs such other, further, and additional relief as this Court 

deems just and appropriate.

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 33 of 34 PageID #:33
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiffs demand a jury trial for all issues so triable.

Respectfully submitted,

CARDELLI ENTERPRISE, L.L.C.,

individually and on behalf of all others

similarly situated

By: __/s/ Antonio DeBlasio____________

 One of Plaintiffs’ Attorneys

Counsel for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class

Antonio DeBlasio

David M. Gower

DEBLASIO & GOWER LLC

2001 Midwest Road, Suite 100

Oak Brook, Illinois 60523

Tel. (630) 560-1123

Fax (630) 364-4206

deblasio@DGLLC.net

gower@DGLLC.net

Peter S. Lubin

Patrick D. Austermuehle

Lubin Austermuehle, P.C.

360 W Butterfield Rd #325

Elmhurst, IL 60126

Tel. (630) 333-0333

peter@l-a.law

patrick@l-a.law

Case: 1:20-cv-03263 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/02/20 Page 34 of 34 PageID #:34