Stinging Dissent
Former Illinois Supreme Court Justice Heiple was a brusque, arrogant and abusive human being. However, I have to give him his props on this part of a short, but blazing dissent in American States Insurance Co., v. Harry Koloms, et al. 177 Ill. 2d 473 (1997).
"Choosing to override the clear language of the insurance contract, however, the majority purports to divine the unstated intent of the parties. With this analysis, coverage is found to be provided. What we have here is not a case of contract construction. It is rather a case of contract reconstruction. As such, it is thimblerigging pure and simple. It also indicates the depths to which a court will go to achieve a desired result. If any principle can be derived from this ruling, it is that words have no meaning.
Accordingly, I respectfully dissent."
Booyah!
"Choosing to override the clear language of the insurance contract, however, the majority purports to divine the unstated intent of the parties. With this analysis, coverage is found to be provided. What we have here is not a case of contract construction. It is rather a case of contract reconstruction. As such, it is thimblerigging pure and simple. It also indicates the depths to which a court will go to achieve a desired result. If any principle can be derived from this ruling, it is that words have no meaning.
Accordingly, I respectfully dissent."
Booyah!
posted by LTC John at 3:38 PM
1 Comments:
Was that an Illinois Supreme court Justice or Jesse Jackson asking about his healthcare insurance?
Post a Comment
<< Home