Central Illinois Light Co. v. Home Insurance

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that, under Illinois law, interpretation of an insurance policy is a question of law that we review de novo
• concluding that CILCO was operating under a legal obligation when it agreed to participate in a voluntary cleanup program because the IEPA suggested that it could do the necessary cleanup \the easy way or the hard way\
• concluding that CILCO was operating under a legal obligation when it agreed to participate in a voluntary cleanup program because the IEPA suggested that it could do the necessary cleanup “the easy way or the hard way”
• Justice Garman, writing for the court, acknowledging that “if the words used in the policy are reasonably susceptible to more than one meaning, they are ambiguous and will be strictly construed against the drafter”
• facts in an affidavit submitted with a motion for summary judgment that are not contradicted by counter- affidavit must be accepted as true
• where the words of an insurance policy are clear and ambiguous, they must be given their plain and ordinary meaning

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).