I’ve always felt badly about the wrongful eviction coverage that is offered as part of “personal and advertising injury” under Part B of the commercial general liability form. It simply does not arise all that frequently in coverage disputes. This wouldn’t be so bad, except that in the definition of “personal and advertising injury,” wrongful eviction sits just one tiny subsection away from defamation and two away from violation of the right of privacy. These two coverages basically own the definition of “personal and advertising injury.” How hard it must be for wrongful eviction to have to sit there and watch these two provisions constantly get talked about and fussed over. Defamation and violation of the right of privacy are the homecoming king and queen. Wrongful eviction is the pimply-faced kid that knows how to thread the movie projector.

This is why the Illinois Court of Appeals’s decision in Doyle Trust v. County Mutual Ins. Co., No. 2-12-1238 (Ill. Ct. App. Sept. 25, 2013) left me with the same feeling I had after watching Rudy. Not only is the opinion all about wrongful eviction coverage, but the court gave it a broad interpretation.

The facts giving rise to the coverage dispute are quite simple. The Doyles leased work space to Christian K. Nakiewicz–Lane. However, during the term of the lease the Doyles sold the leased premises. In doing so they removed Christian’s personal items, without his permission, and placed them in a garbage dump or storage. The items included artwork that Christian had created over his lifetime. [There’s got to be more to this story.]

Christian sued the Doyles for violation of the Visual Artists Rights Act, conversion and violation of the Illinois Forcible Entry and Detainer Act. The Doyles requested a defense and indemnity from their insurer -- Country Mutual Insurance Company. Country Mutual denied owing a defense and indemnity. Coverage litigation ensued and made its way to the Illinois Court of Appeals.

At issue was the availability of coverage under the liability policy’s provision for “personal and advertising injury,” defined in part as “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 appeals court held that coverage was owed. The court refused to restrict the definition of “eviction” to include only physical harm to a person on the basis that the policy listed such phrase under “personal and advertising injury” as opposed to “property damage.” “Christian’s complaint in the federal lawsuit alleged that the Doyles violated the Illinois Forcible Entry and Detainer Act by evicting Christian and disposing of his personal contents. Christian further alleged that the Doyles did not compensate him for the value of those items. . . . [T]he essence of an eviction is a landlord taking actions with the intent of dispossessing a tenant of property, and therefore, is not limited to physical injury to a person. As a result, although the policy listed wrongful eviction under the ‘personal and advertising injury’ section, because the plain and ordinary meaning of ‘eviction’ is to deprive a tenant of the right to enjoy a leased premises, we conclude that the policy coverage at issue here included alleged property damage resulting from dispossessing Christian of rental property.”