Wrongful Eviction Includes Property Damage Claim Resulting from Dispossessing of Property
October 28, 2013
This case involves the interpretation of “wrongful eviction” and the application of the term to the actions of the insured in removing a tenant's personal property. This case is The John T. Doyle Trust v. Country Mutual Insurance Company, 2013 IL App (2d) 121238-U. This is an unpublished opinion.
The insured (Doyle Trust and the Doyles, collectively) leased work space to Christian Nakiewicz-Lane. During the lease term, the Doyles sold the leased premises and in the process, removed Christian's personal items. As a result, Christian filed a lawsuit. The Doyles sought coverage under an insurance policy issued by Country Mutual. Country Mutual denied coverage and the Doyles brought a complaint for a declaratory judgment. The trial court ruled in favor of the Doyles and the insurer appealed.
The appeals court noted that the Doyles sold the premises and removed Christian's contents from the premises without his permission, placing the items in either a garbage dump or in storage. The court also noted that the Country Mutual policy provided liability coverage for personal and advertising injury, which included “the wrongful eviction from, wrongful entry into, or invasion of the right of private occupancy of a room, dwelling, or premises that a person occupies, committed by or on behalf of its owner, landlord, or lessor.”
The court found that the essence of an eviction is a landlord taking actions with the intent of dispossessing a tenant of property. The court said that this was not limited to physical injury to a person. As a result, although the policy listed wrongful eviction under the personal and advertising injury section of the policy, because the plain and ordinary meaning of eviction is to deprive a tenant of the right to enjoy a leased premises, the court concluded that the policy included coverage for alleged property damage resulting from dispossessing Christian of rental property.
The court held that removing Christian's contents, possessions, and his artwork was one method to deprive him of his right to enjoy the leased premises. If the insurer intended to limit the commonly understood definition of eviction to include only wrongfully evicting a person and not property, the court said it could have added express language in the policy to reflect that intent. This was not done. The court refused to restrict the definition of eviction to include only physical harm to a person merely because the policy listed that phrase under personal and advertising injury as opposed to under property damage. In any event, the court went on, to the extent an ambiguity is created by listing wrongful eviction under personal and advertising injury and not under property damage, it must construe ambiguity against the insurer.
Because Christian alleged in his lawsuit that his personal property was damaged as a result of Doyles' wrongfully evicting him, Country Mutual had a duty to defend the Doyles. The ruling of the trial court was affirmed.
Editor's Note: The standard CGL form defines personal and advertising injury as injury, not bodily injury, but injury. In this instance, the appeals court found that Christian did suffer an injury in that his right of private occupancy and his right of possession of his private property were violated by the actions of the insured. As the court said, the essence of an eviction is a landlord taking actions with the intent of dispossessing a tenant of property. The insureds' removing Christian's possessions did just that, and the policy required at the very least a duty to defend the insureds.