{
  "id": 5454386,
  "name": "Briggs Hotel Company, Appellee, v. The Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance Company, Ltd., Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Briggs Hotel Co. v. Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance",
  "decision_date": "1919-03-10",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 24,759",
  "first_page": "334",
  "last_page": "336",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "213 Ill. App. 334"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 274,
    "char_count": 5211,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.499,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 3.6124511955560164e-07,
      "percentile": 0.88827089919142
    },
    "sha256": "3f6b3ef3ce548d8db26c0bf82d5f33e69e5fe0ff829b3c39d4547b957439fe54",
    "simhash": "1:272f17d591b96b9d",
    "word_count": 832
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:37:55.679199+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Briggs Hotel Company, Appellee, v. The Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance Company, Ltd., Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice McSurely\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nPlaintiff brought suit alleging that the defendant, a corporation engaged in the insurance business, had agreed to indemnify plaintiff for a period of 3 years against certain losses and expenses; that plaintiff had incurred expenses to the amount of $537.62, which defendant under its contract of insurance was obligated to repay to plaintiff. Upon trial by the court plaintiff was found entitled to this amount, and judgment was entered against defendant for $537.62, from which it appeals.\nThere is no dispute as to the facts. While the policy was in force one Edmund Eddy was injured while on the sidewalk adjacent to plaintiff\u2019s premises. This was reported to the defendant in accordance with the terms of the policy, and an investigation made. Some months later Eddy commenced a suit against the Briggs Hotel Company, in an action of trespass, alleging in his declaration that the defendant, the Briggs Hotel Company, had committed an assault and b\u00e1ttery upon him, inflicting injuries, and that such injuries were caused by a wilful and malicious assaulting and beating of the plaintiff, Eddy. Upon the commencement of such suit notice was given by the Hotel Company to the Insurance Company in accordance with the terms of the policy, and when Eddy\u2019s declaration was filed the Insurance Company notified the Hotel Company that the injuries alleged by Eddy were not such as were covered by the policy issued by the Insurance Company to the Hotel Company, and that Eddy\u2019s suit was not such as the policy required the Insurance Company to defend. The Hotel Company thereupon undertook the defense of Eddy\u2019s suit on its own account and expended therein the amount now in controversy. The Hotel Company was successful in that suit, and a judgment in favor of the defendant was entered.\nThe provisions of the insurance policy which are material are as follows:\n\u201cThe Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance Company, Limited (herein called the company), does hereby agree with the assured, respecting bodily injuries * * * accidentally suffered or alleged to have been suffered, during the policy period * * * by any person or persons * * * while within or upon the premises described * * * or upon the sidewalks or other ways immediately adjacent thereto, from any cause whatsoever * * * as follows:\nAgreement I\u2014Damages.\n\u201cTo indemnify the assured against loss from the liability imposed by law upon the assured for damages.\nAgreement II\u2014Service.\n\u201cTo give prompt and efficient service * * * (c) in defending any suit brought to recover damages on account of such cases of bodily injuries * *\nWe are of the opinion that the suit brought by Eddy does not come within the terms of the defendant\u2019s policy, and that it was under no obligation to defend the same. By the policy defendant specifically undertook to indemnify the plaintiff against losses \u201crespecting bodily injuries * * * accidentally suffered or alleged to have been suffered * * * by any person,\u201d and service was to be rendered in defending any suit \u201cbrought to recover damages on account of such cases of bodily injuries.\u201d This clearly means a suit brought to recover damages on a claim for bodily injuries accidentally suffered. Eddy\u2019s suit against the Hotel Company was clearly not of this character; he asserted a wilful and malicious assault. The result of his suit has no bearing upon the contract of the Insurance Company. Neither is the dictionary definition of the word \u201caccident\u201d of much importance. Defendant was obligated for its service only in the event of a suit claiming injuries from accident, and Eddy\u2019s declaration filed in his suit negatives such injuries by asserting that they were inflicted wilfully and maliciously.\nThis consideration makes it unnecessary to refer to the points discussed by counsel. It follows that the finding and judgment of the trial court were improper. The judgment will therefore be reversed, and as under the terms of the contract there is no liability for the claim of plaintiff, judgment of nil capiat will be entered in this court.\nReversed and judgment here.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice McSurely"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Wilkerson, Cassels & Potter, for appellant; Ralph F. Potter, of counsel.",
      "Ivor Jeffreys and William Mathiesen, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Briggs Hotel Company, Appellee, v. The Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance Company, Ltd., Appellant.\nGen. No. 24,759.\nIndemnity, \u00a7 11 \u2014what is not action for injuries accidentally suffered within indemnity policy. An action brought against a hotel company for damages for a wilful and malicious assaulting and beating of a person is not within the terms of an indemnity policy by which the insurer agrees to indemnify the company \u2022against losses \u201crespecting bodily injuries * * * accidentally suffered * * * by any person\u201d and service was to be rendered in defending any suit \u201cbrought to recover damages on account of such cases of bodily injuries.\u201d\nAppeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph Z. Uhxik, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1918.\nReversed and judgment here.\nOpinion filed March 10, 1919.\nWilkerson, Cassels & Potter, for appellant; Ralph F. Potter, of counsel.\nIvor Jeffreys and William Mathiesen, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0334-01",
  "first_page_order": 366,
  "last_page_order": 368
}