Additional Insured Coverage Disputes

Construction contracts, leases, and vendor agreements often require one party to name another as an additional insured. As an additional insured coverage lawyer for Illinois owners, contractors, landlords, and tenants, Allison Cho Law represents businesses in Chicago and the North Shore when the other party’s insurer refuses a tender, denies a defense, or will not pay.

The contract and the policy must line up, and often they do not. The contract may promise additional insured status, but only the policy’s endorsement decides whether it exists and what it covers. A certificate of insurance is not coverage. Older endorsements reached injuries “arising out of” the named insured’s work; many current forms cover the additional insured only for injury caused, at least in part, by the named insured’s acts or omissions. That wording often decides whether a general contractor sued over a subcontractor’s work has a defense.

Illinois law favors the additional insured on the duty to defend. Courts compare the underlying complaint to the endorsement, and in additional insured disputes they may also consider a third-party complaint that alleges the named insured’s fault. When several policies could respond, Illinois allows the insured to choose which insurer defends, and primary and noncontributory language can decide which policy pays first. Where the other party never obtained the required coverage, the remedy may be a breach of contract claim against that party instead.

Our articles on snow removal contractors sued with their customers and landlord indemnity demands after common-area injuries show how additional insured coverage works alongside indemnity. If your tender has been denied or ignored, schedule a consultation before defense costs build.