1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.E.2d
  4. 896 N.E.2d
  5. 896 N.E.2d 394 (2008)
 

CZAPSKI v. MAHER

Nos. 1-07-2137, 1-07-2207, 1-07-2266.

896 N.E.2d 394 (2008)

Mark CZAPSKI and Anna Czapski-Florek, Co-Special Administrators of the Estate of Roger Czapski, Deceased, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Christopher MAHER, Progressive Universal Insurance Company f/k/a Progressive Universale Insurance Company of Illinois, a Corporation, Progressive Premier Insurance Company of Illinois, a Corporation, National Casualty Company, a Corporation, and Federal Insurance Company, a Corporation, Defendants-Appellees. Paul Jasinski and Thomas Guarnieri, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Christopher Maher, Scottsdale Indemnity Company, a Corporation, National Casualty Company, a Corporation, Federal Insurance Company, a Corporation, and Progressive Universal Insurance Company, f/k/a Progressive Universal Insurance Company of Illinois, a Corporation, Defendants-Appellees. National Casualty Company, Cross-Plaintiff, Third-Party Plaintiff, Appellee, v. Christopher Maher, Cross-Defendant, Appellant, and Sarah Ferris, Mark Czapski and Anna Czapski-Florek, Co-Special Administrators of the Estate of Roger Czapski, Deceased, Third-Party Defendants, Appellants.

Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, First Division.

September 30, 2008.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Connelly, Roberts & McGivney, LLC (Thomas R. Rakowski of Counsel), Lloyd & Cavanagh (Timothy J. Cavanagh and Matthew M. Rundio, of Counsel), Chicago, IL, for Appellants, Czapski and Czapski-Florek.

Leyhane & Associates, Ltd. (Francis J. Leyhane III of Counsel), James J. Roche & Associates James J. Roche and LeeAnn M. Crow of Counsel), Chicago, IL, for Appellants Jasinki and Guarnieri.

Meagher & Geer, PLLP (Pro Hac Vice) Thomas H. Crouch, Esq. and Kurt M. Zitzer, Esq. of Counsel), Scottsdale, AZ, Tressler, Sodestrom, Maloney & Priess, LLP (James R. Murray, Esq. of Counsel), Chicago, IL, for Appellee, National Casualty Company.

Presiding Justice ROBERT E. GORDON delivered the opinion of the court:

This consolidated appeal arises from a trial court's finding of no coverage under two insurance policies issued to an automobile dealership. The major issue presented before the trial court was whether a test-driver of a motor vehicle owned by an automobile dealership was a "customer" of that dealership for purposes of an exclusionary clause, excluding "customers" from coverage, under an automobile...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases