Court Opinion

ID: 9726044
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 12:28:52.64518+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:25:23.107222
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE KUEHN, specially concurring: Our opinion today differs from views taken by other members of this court. Their views flowed inexorably from a paramount rule of statutory'construction that prevents a search for meaning beyond unambiguous statutory language. While I concur with Justice Chapman’s opinion, I wish to underscore that the origins of our approach can be found in the words of our supreme court, first noted in Cummins v. Country Mutual Insurance Co., 281 Ill. App. 3d 5, 666 N.E.2d 909 (1996). Our approach does not pioneer an uncharted course by looking beyond the language contained in the underinsured motorist statute. In Sulser v. Country Mutual Insurance Co., 147 Ill. 2d 548, 591 N.E.2d 427 (1992), the supreme court stated: "The court must assume that, in enacting a statute, the legislature did not intend an absurd result. [Citations.] In enacting [the underinsured motorist provision] the legislature avoided the absurdity of a situation where a policyholder would receive fewer benefits in the fortuitous event of being injured by an underinsured rather than an uninsured motorist.” Sulser, 147 Ill. 2d at 557, 591 N.E.2d at 430. The court instructed consideration of legislative intent based upon the words of the House bill’s sponsor, Representative Telcser, who said, " 'we wanted to be sure that *** the difference between the claim and the underinsured would be taken care of by your own insurance policy to fill the gap between the claim and the amount available from the underinsured ***.’ ” (Emphasis added.) Sulser, 147 Ill. 2d at 556, 591 N.E.2d at 430, quoting 81st Ill. Gen. Assem., House Proceedings, June 20, 1980, at 44-45. Had the plaintiffs in our case been injured by an uninsured motorist, each could have recovered any amount up to the full limits of his or her own uninsured motorist coverage. Since the amount available from the underinsured motorist has been exhausted, plaintiffs are entitled to "fill the gap” between the available amount received and their own underinsured motorist coverage. To otherwise construe the underinsured motorist provision would ignore its drafters’ intent in favor of one which produces absurd results. I, therefore, specially concur.