Opinion ID: 2480161
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Circuit Court's Findings and Ruling

Text: The circuit court found it undisputed that although Liggett was aware of potential litigation from Kuzma in November 2000, Liggett satisfied himself that this was no big deal. Therefore, he did not notify West American of a potential claim at that time. When Kuzma filed suit in September 2001, Liggett notified Kramer, who began the defense. Yet, despite the insurance policy's notice requirements, the court found that a copy of Kuzma's complaint was not tendered to the Zeiter-Dickson agency or to West American. The circuit court further found it undisputed that a conversation between Liggett and Dickson took place at the bank. However, the court determined that the only contents of the conversation was that there was a lawsuit in Ottawa, kind of a he said/she said thing on defamation. No testimony as to when this defamation took place. There was no copy of the complaint. There was no request for any of that information. It was sort of an in passing conversation, do we have any coverage on that. In addition, the circuit court found that information regarding the Kuzma matter was presented to Yorkville's board of directors on two occasions, and both times Dickson was in attendance in his capacity as a director. However, because the evidence consisted only of what was set forth in the minutes, the court further found that [t]he minutes don't contain any information about where the suit was filed, when the incident allegedly took place, who the parties to the lawsuit were. Finally, with respect to Liggett and Kramer's testimony regarding conversations with Ottosen, the court believed that at some point Mr. Liggett said something to Mr. Ottosen but the content of which is very hard to determine, [as is] the context of when it was [said]. The court, however, flatly rejected the testimony of Liggett and Kramer that they participated in two conference calls with Ottosen, finding that their statements were not credible and that these calls did not take place. The court found support for this conclusion in the fact that when Wiegmann contacted Ottosen in January 2004 regarding whether his personal homeowner's policy could provide coverage for the Kuzma lawsuit, Ottosen immediately took action and documented the steps taken in the process. Ottosen's quick actions with regards to Wiegmann's inquiry stood in contrast to the testimony of Liggett and Kramer that although Ottosen took phone calls from the bank president and a lawyer he did not even document that    and ignore[d] it completely. The circuit court judge concluded, I don't find that to be credible. The circuit court then applied the law to these findings of fact. Although the court acknowledged that a gap existed in the conversation between Liggett and Dickson to the extent that Dickson was not given all the details of the Kuzma lawsuit, the court nevertheless held that Liggett's conversation with Dickson was sufficient to place West American on actual notice that a lawsuit had been filed against Yorkville, providing it with adequate information to locate and defend the action. When this conversation was combined with the additional information regarding the Kuzma lawsuit provided during the Yorkville board of directors meetings that Dickson attended, the court concluded that [t]he totality of the situation is that there is notice. Although the court found some evidence of prejudice to West American due to notice being given to it after discovery was closed and the case was set for trial, because the Kuzma action had been mentioned several times and Yorkville was told that there was no coverage, the fact that they were late reporting it, I don't know that that's unreasonable. Thus, the circuit court held that West American owed a duty to provide coverage to Yorkville and directed West American to pay stipulated damages in the amount of $1,982,778.78.