Lessors Should be Entitled to Waive Insurer’s Right of Subrogation
Post 4867
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gGHhae7d, see the full video at https://lnkd.in/g5TbD-aS and at https://lnkd.in/gjFykVPy and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4850 posts.
In a subrogation action, Plaintiff Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company (Philadelphia), as subrogee of Renaissance Realty Group, Inc. (Renaissance), appealed from the circuit court’s partial grant of defendant Norinaica Gonzalez’s motion to dismiss.
In Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company, a/s/o Renaissance Realty Group, Inc. v. Norinaica Gonzalez, 2024 IL App (1st) 230833, No. 1-23-0833, Court of Appeals of Illinois, First District, Sixth Division (August 23, 2024)
BACKGROUND
On September 25, 2019, Renaissance and Gonzalez entered into a written lease agreement (hereinafter “Lease”) for an apartment (“Unit 601”) in a multi-unit building located on the 1500 block of West Belmont Avenue in Chicago.
The Lease contains multiple provisions relevant to the resolution of Philadelphia’s claims. On the first page of the Lease, Unit 601 is described as the “Leased Address (Premises)” and Tenant was required to maintain the Premises in a clean, presentable and safe condition at all times.
On January 20, 2021, Philadelphia sued Gonzalez as subrogee to Renaissance. Therein, Philadelphia alleged that on August 7, 2020, a small fire started in Gonzalez’s kitchen in Unit 601, which caused “a substantial amount of smoke” and activated the building’s sprinkler system. The sprinkler system caused significant water damage to both Unit 601 and other units, totaling over $200,000.
THE INSURANCE CLAIMS
Renaissance submitted an insurance claim to Philadelphia, which paid “in excess of $50,000 to cover” repairs and lost rental income. Philadelphia alleged Gonzalez was liable to reimburse Philadelphia, as subrogee to Renaissance, for this coverage. Specifically, count I of the complaint alleged Gonzalez negligently caused the fire that resulted in the property damage. Count II alleged that Gonzalez breached the Lease because it required her to pay for any damages caused by her negligence, but she violated this term by refusing to reimburse Philadelphia.
Gonzalez moved to dismiss the complaint arguing she was an implied coinsured of Renaissance’s policy pursuant to the Illinois Supreme Court’s holding in Dix Mutual Insurance Co. v. LaFramboise, 149 Ill.2d 314 (1992), and thus could not be sued by Philadelphia in subrogation.
On June 30, 2021, Philadelphia responded, arguing in relevant part that the Lease terms demonstrated the parties’ intent not to make Gonzalez an implied coinsured.
The trial court found Philadelphia could not “seek compensation for damage beyond” Unit 601. Philadelphia moved for summary judgment regarding the damages arising from Unit 601 only, which it alleged totaled $18,831.04. The circuit court granted Philadelphia’s motion for summary judgment as to liability only on Counts I and II for damages to Unit 601, with the total of those damages to be determined at trial.
ANALYSIS
This case presents a matter of contractual interpretation, as a lease is a contract and, as such, it is governed by the rules which govern contracts generally. Where a contract’s terms are clear and unambiguous, the appellate court must enforce those terms without reference to extrinsic sources.
The key factor in determining whether the parties intended to exculpate the tenant from liability for negligently caused fire damage to the leased premises is the allocation of insurance burdens as evidenced by the lease. When the provisions of the lease either explicitly or implicitly indicate that the lessor will obtain insurance against the risk of fire loss to its building, the tenant will normally not be liable for negligently causing fire damage to that building unless the parties’ contrary intent is clear. Such a rule gives effect to the parties’ probable and customary intent that the landlord is to look to the insurance he has agreed to procure for indemnification for fire loss.
The Court of Appeals found that Philadelphia and Gonzalez did not intend for Gonzalez to be generally liable for negligently caused fire damage outside of Unit 601. If the parties had intended for Gonzalez to be liable for negligent conduct in other areas besides Unit 601, they would have done so with lease terms making her liable for negligently causing damage to the “property,” “common area,” or “elsewhere in the building.” The Lease does not do so.
Philadelphia’s final claim is that equitable principles dictate that it should have a right to recover on a subrogation claim against Gonzalez. This argument fails because Philadelphia cannot overcome a core tenet of the equitable remedy of subrogation-a subrogee can have no greater right than the subrogor and can enforce only such rights as a subrogor could enforce per the Lease Renaissance has no right to recover against Gonzalez for damages outside of Unit 601, and, therefore, neither does Philadelphia as subrogee to Renaissance’s rights.
Because the Lease shows the parties’ intended Gonzalez not to be liable for damages outside of Unit 601the circuit court’s limitation on Philadelphia’s recoverable damages was affirmed.
ZALMA OPINION
Suing, in subrogation, a tenant of an insured generally causes problems between insured’s and the insurer. For that reason most commercial property policies include a provision that the insured may waive the insurer’s right to subrogation against a tenant. Since the landlord did not waive the court made a Solomon-like decision and only held her responsible for damage to her unit in the building. The Court of Appeals did justice and the insured and its tenant resolved the dispute. Many courts, including Illinois, include an exclusion not written, that Philadelphia’s insurance was issued for the mutual benefit of the insured and the tenant.
(c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.
Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.
Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe or Subscribe to my substack at https://lnkd.in/gmmzUVBy
Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg
Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYkPlease tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe.
Arbitration Award Prevents Bad Faith Claims
Post number 5298
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/anti-assignment-clause-policy-defeats-attempt-assign-barry-ffmyc, see the video at and at and at https://www.zalma.com/blog plus more than 5250 posts.
Why Consent to $9 Million Judgment and Assignment to Sue Insurer was Worthless
In Carmen Ciotola, as assignee Of Quarterback Transportation, Inc. v. RSA Insurance Group, PLC, et al., Civil Action No. 3:21-1020, United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania (March 2, 2026) resolved the dispute brought by Ciotola. Carmen Ciotola, as assignee of Quarterback Transportation, Inc., brought an insurance action against RSA Insurance Group, PLC (now RSA Insurance Group Limited) and its subsidiaries, alleging breach of contract and bad faith.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
The dispute arose from a motor vehicle accident on November 12, 2018, in Luzerne ...
Counterclaim Seeking Payment of its Fraudulent Bills Fails
Post number 5297
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/statutory-right-defraud-insurer-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-03c3e, see the video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5250 posts.
Fraudsters Attempt to Use Statute to Force Payment Fails
In Connecticut General Life Insurance Co. et al. v. East Coast Advanced Plastic Surgery, LLC, No. 25 Civ. 1686 (PAE), United States District Court, S.D. New York (February 24, 2026) a dispute between Connecticut General Life Insurance Company and its subsidiary Cigna Health and Life Insurance Company (collectively, "Cigna" ) and East Coast Advanced Plastic Surgery, LLC ("ECAPS" ), a New Jersey-based medical practice specializing in post-mastectomy breast reconstruction.
Cigna alleged that ECAPS engaged in fraudulent billing practices, resulting in excessive payments for services rendered ...
Supreme Court of Alabama Grants a Rare Request for Mandate
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/limitation-defeats-suit-against-insurer-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-eychc, see the video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5250 posts.
Statute of Limitations Demands Summary Judgment for Insurer
Post number 5296
In Ex parte Alfa Mutual Insurance Company and Jeffery Dimoff, In re Kinsman Investments, LLC v. Alfa Mutual Insurance Company and Jeffery Dimoff, No. SC-2025-0478, Supreme Court of Alabama (February 27, 2026) a rare Petition for Writ of Mandamus was granted and the trial court was ordered to enter summary judgment on behalf of Alfa.
Facts
Kinsman Investments, LLC (“Kinsman”) owned an apartment complex in Mobile, Alabama, which suffered significant damage from Hurricane Katrina in August 2005. At the time, the property was insured by Alfa Mutual Insurance Company (“Alfa”). Jeffery...
Contract Breaches that Allow Multiple Different Grounds to Make a Policy Void
More from Excellence in Claims Handling Substack for Subscribers Only. You can Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe
Posted on February 24, 2026 by Barry Zalma
You’re reading from the free part of Excellence in Claims Handling until you reach the paywall. You should consider joining as a paid member to get full access to articles for members only, to our news, analysis, insurance coverage, claims, insurance fraud and insurance webinars, by clicking at the “subscribe” link below.
If an insured breaches one or more material warranties and increases the risk covered by the policy, the contract may be voided by the insurer, depending on the jurisdiction. It is, therefore, essential that every claims investigation include efforts to establish compliance with every warranty.
In Cummings v. Fire Insurance Exchange, 292 Cal. App. 3d 1407, 249 Cal. Rptr. 568 (1988), the Court of Appeal ...
Passover for Americans
Posted on February 19, 2026 by Barry Zalma
“The Passover Seder For Americans”
For more than 3,000 years Jewish fathers have told the story of the Exodus of the enslaved Jews from Egypt. Telling the story has been required of all Jewish fathers. Americans, who have lived in North America for more than 300 years have become Americans and many have lost the ability to read, write and understand the Hebrew language in which the story of Passover was first told in the Torah. Passover is one of the many holidays Jewish People celebrate to help them remember the importance of G_d in their lives. We see the animals, the oceans, the rivers, the mountains, the rain, sun, the planets, the stars, and the people and wonder how did all these wonderful things come into being. Jews believe the force we call G_d created the entire universe and everything in it. Jews feel G_d is all seeing and knowing and although we can’t see Him, He is everywhere and in everyone.We understand...
Passover for Americans
Posted on February 19, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/passover-americans-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-5vgkc.
“The Passover Seder For Americans”
For more than 3,000 years Jewish fathers have told the story of the Exodus of the enslaved Jews from Egypt. Telling the story has been required of all Jewish fathers. Americans, who have lived in North America for more than 300 years have become Americans and many have lostthe ability to read, write and understand the Hebrew language in which the story of Passover was first told in the Torah.
Passover is one of the many holidays Jewish People celebrate to help them remember the importance of G_d in their lives. We see the animals, the oceans, the rivers, the mountains, the rain, sun, the planets, the stars, and the people and ...
