Breach of Insurance Cooperation
The Appellate Court filed this opinion specifically to clarify Illinois law regarding the scope of an insured’s duty to cooperate in the context of coverage.
Piser insured a motorcycle with State Farm. Piser claimed the vehicle was stolen on September 23, 2006. State Farm investigated the claim and interviewed Piser for three hours regarding the claim and began its investigation.
State Farm requested that Piser fill out and return a financial authorization to enable State Farm to obtain his credit report. The Court described this procedure as routine, to determine whether the insured has a motive to file a false claim. Piser did not remit the form. State Farm sent another request to return the form on October 26, 2006. Piser did not respond to the correspondence. State Farm then requested Piser appear for a sworn statement under oath with a State Farm attorney. Again, several notices were sent without a response from Piser. State Farm also sent three other requests seeking multiple documents from Piser which were never responded to.
Piser argued that the affirmative matter offered was merely evidence that would contradict the facts pled in Piser’s complaint and was therefore not an affirmative defense under 619 (a)(9).The Appellate Court disagreed, holding that an insured’s failure to cooperate is indeed a valid defense setting forth “other affirmative matter” barring a claim pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-619(a)(9). An affidavit and other supporting materials showing a breach of the cooperation clause properly raise additional matter defeating the claim of Piser and did not merely contradict the pleadings.
