Repair Costs Are Materially Relevant
Plaintiffs, Stendera and Dajewski, had a homeowner’s policy issued by State Farm when their home was damaged by a fire. Plaintiffs claimed $123,765.69 in damages to their personal property under the Personal Property coverage of the policy. State Farm refused to provide coverage, alleging that Plaintiffs intentionally caused the fire, but did provide Plaintiffs with about $8,000 for a security deposit on temporary housing and an advance. State Farm did pay Wells Fargo $174,191.24 for its loss under the Mortgage clause section of the policy. After Plaintiffs submitted to Wells Fargo a “Certificate of Completion of Repairs”, Wells Fargo transferred the amount paid from State Farm to Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs filed a suit against State Farm for breach of contract, based on State Farm not paying Plaintiffs under the Personal Property Clause. During discovery, Plaintiffs proved that they spent about $30,000 in repairs, but refused to provide further evidence of repairs on the grounds that it was irrelevant. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of State Farm, holding that State Farm was entitled to a set off and had overpaid about $30,000 (the difference between the $180,000 paid to Plaintiffs and Wells Fargo and the $150,000 in damages actually claimed by Plaintiffs ($123,000 in personal property damages and $30,000 in repairs)).
On appeal, the court reversed and remanded based on a question of material fact with the amount spent on repairs to the property. First, the court held that State Farm was entitled to a “set off” under the definition “a situation when a defendant has a distinct cause of action against the same plaintiff who filed suit against him, which is subsumed procedurally under the context of a counterclaim.” State Farm filed a counterclaim against Plaintiffs, arguing that it was entitled to a reduction in damages based on what it paid Wells Fargo. Second, the court held that an issue of material fact existed with regard to the amount paid for repairs. Plaintiffs had refused to provide receipts in addition to the $30,000 because they argued it was irrelevant. The court remanded the case to determine the actual amount of repairs.
Stendera v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company, 2012 WL 2234361, —N.E.2d —- (Ill.App. 1 Dist., 2012), No. 1-11-1462.
