• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
McKenna Storer

McKenna Storer

AV Rated Chicago Law Firm

  • Home
  • Insurance
    • Insurance Defense
    • Toxic Tort and Mass Tort Litigation
    • Construction Law
    • Commercial Transportation Law
    • Insurance Coverage
    • Professional Malpractice Defense
    • Medical Malpractice Defense
    • Legal Malpractice Defense
    • Appellate Practice
  • Business
    • Corporate Law & Commercial Litigation
    • Litigation Defense
    • SBA Lending
    • Commercial Real Estate
    • Appellate Practice
    • Health Care Law
    • Business Formation
    • Data Privacy and Cyber Liability
    • Employment Law
    • Employment Litigation
    • Workplace Harassment
  • Individual
    • Estate Planning
    • Wills and Trusts
    • Real Estate
    • Mediation Services
  • Banking Law
  • Our Attorneys
  • Our Firm
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
    • Chicago Office
    • Woodstock Office
  • Show Search
Hide Search

Why An Excess Insurer Cannot Seek Equitable Contribution From A Primary Insurer

mckenna · December 5, 2016 ·

There are many situations where one insurance coverage company will seek contribution from another insurance company for defense costs and indemnity payments. However, this does not give insurers a carte blanche to file lawsuits against each other seeking reimbursement.

Equitable contribution, equitable subrogation and contractual subrogation are all theories that are used to seek contribution and subrogation between insurers.  However, these theories are all relatively nuanced and cannot be pursued by insurers in every situation.

For example, Illinois law is well settled as to recovery under a theory of equitable contribution. “In order for an insurer to recover under a theory of equitable contribution, the insurer seeking contribution must prove: 1) all facts necessary to the claimant’s recovery against the insured; 2) the reasonableness of the amount paid to the insured; and 3) an identity between the policies as to parties and insurable interests and risks.
In Illinois, an excess insurer cannot seek equitable contribution from a primary insurer because excess carriers and primary carriers insure different risks.” Schal Bovis v. Casualty Insurance Company, 315 Ill.App.3d 353, 732 N.E.2d 1179 (1st Dist. 2000).

Determining which carrier is primary and excess is not always clear cut. It can involve the interpretation of both insurance policies and contracts between insureds and those claiming to be insureds under the policy. But, once this determination is made, if the excess carrier pursues a contribution action from a primary carrier, it cannot do so through a theory of equitable contribution. This does not mean there is no avenue for an excess insurer to seek subrogation from a primary carrier, but an excess insurer will not be able to pursue an equitable contribution action against a primary insurer.

Please contact Kelly Purkey at McKenna Storer for information about this topic and other Insurance Coverage questions. Find out more about the insurance coverage law services that we offer.

Insurance Litigation Defense

About mckenna

McKenna Storer is a corporate law firm that provides a full spectrum of legal services for businesses and individuals. More than half of our lawyers have received positive peer review ratings from Martindale Hubbell, including 10 individual Preeminent AV ratings.
McKenna Storer has been serving its clients for more than 66 years. We are open and available for consultations at both our Chicago and Woodstock locations. Please follow us on or our LinkedIn, Twitter or Facebook pages.

Chicago Office
McKenna, Storer
33 N. LaSalle, Suite 1400
Chicago, Illinois 60602
312.558.3900
312.558.8348
Mo,Tu,We,Th,Fr 8:30 am – 5:00 pm
Woodstock Office
McKenna, Storer
1060 Lake Avenue
Woodstock, Illinois 60098
815.334.9690
815.334.9697
Mo,Tu,We,Th 8:30 am – 5:00 pm

  • Home
  • Insurance
  • Business
  • Individual
  • Banking Law
  • Our Attorneys
  • Our Firm
  • Blog
  • Contact Us