Background
James Browning sued Thomas Collins, alleging that Collins rear-ended him and caused injuries. Collins died while the case was pending. Defense counsel moved to appoint Katelyn Breen, counsel’s secretary, as a special representative to defend the case under section 2-1008(b)(2) of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure; Browning’s counsel did not object.
A jury awarded Browning $655,000 plus costs. Breen sought remittitur based on the statute’s limitation of recovery to liability-insurance proceeds, which were $100,000. She also sought a new trial based on an isolated reference to State Farm insurance and the admission of biomechanical rebuttal testimony from Browning’s expert.
The Court’s Holding
The appellate court affirmed the denial of a new trial but reversed the denial of remittitur. Although defense counsel made the motion for the special representative, Browning’s acquiescence constituted an election to proceed under section 2-1008(b)(2). Having obtained the benefit of avoiding probate, Browning was subject to the statute’s corresponding limitation: recovery could reach only the liability-insurance proceeds protecting Collins’s estate.
The court rejected Browning’s argument that lack of notice to Collins’s heirs or legatees defeated the limitation, explaining that any notice defect did not make the special-representative appointment void. It also held that the single insurance reference was isolated and unresponsive, with no demonstrated prejudice, and that Browning’s biomechanical expert properly rebutted defense reconstruction testimony implying the impact could not have caused Browning’s injuries.
Key Takeaways
- A plaintiff who acquiesces in appointment of a special representative under section 2-1008(b)(2) elects that procedure and accepts its insurance-proceeds cap.
- The $655,000 verdict must be reduced to the estate’s $100,000 available liability-insurance proceeds.
- An isolated, inadvertent insurance reference and proper causation rebuttal testimony did not warrant a new trial.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores the tradeoff in using Illinois’s special-representative procedure after a defendant dies: avoiding probate can limit the plaintiff’s eventual recovery to available liability coverage. Parties should address that consequence before consenting to such an appointment.
The court remanded with directions to reduce Browning’s recovery to the insurance proceeds while leaving the jury trial otherwise intact.