Trial Court’s Erroneous Order must be Obeyed until Such Order is Set Aside
In Country Mutual Insurance Co. v. Hilltop View, the trial court entered an order finding Country Mutual Insurance Company (“Country”) willfully failed to comply with orders the court entered on October 26, 2012, and February 21, 2013. As a result, the court found Country to be in indirect civil contempt for its willful failure and refusal to obey the court’s October 26, 2012, and February 21, 2013, orders. To purge itself of contempt, the court directed Country to pay the clerk of the court on behalf of defendants, Hilltop View, LLC (“Hilltop”) and Professional Swine Management, LLC (“PSM”), $96,990.04, which included all reasonable legal costs and fees incurred by Hilltop and PSM in connection with the declaratory judgment proceeding between February 21, 2013, and October 8, 2013. In addition, the court found that Country’s course of conduct regarding the October and February orders had been vexatious, unreasonable, and in bad faith.
Country contended that the trial court’s orders requiring payment of Hilltop’s and PSM’s attorney fees and costs in the underlying case and the declaratory judgment action were not enforceable until either judgment had been reached on all the claims in the case or a Rule 304(a) finding was made by the trial court “that there is no just reason for delaying either enforcement or appeal or both” of the orders. On the other hand, the trial court, Hilltop, and PSM viewed the rulings not as “judgments,” but simply as immediately enforceable ancillary orders. We need not determine who was right on this issue to decide this appeal.
The court reviewed: (1) whether the circuit court erred in holding Country in contempt for not making immediate payment of the defense costs in the underlying case pursuant to the October 2012 orders; (2) whether the trial court erred in holding Country in contempt for not making immediate payment of Hilltop’s and PSM’s attorney fees in the declaratory judgment action pursuant to the February 2013 orders; and (3) whether the trial court erred in finding Country’s conduct in response to the October orders and the February orders was vexatious, unreasonable, and in bad faith when there was at least a bona fide dispute regarding Country’s position. The court ruled, without an order directing Country to pay a sum certain for attorney fees, the court could not appropriately hold Country in contempt for failing to pay an amount determined solely by Hilltop’s and PSM’s attorneys. Thus, the court erred when it found Country in contempt for failing to pay attorney fees in this case pursuant to the court’s February order.
Illinois Insurance Law: A party must obey a trial court’s respective orders, regardless of whether the court erred in entering the respective orders, until any erroneous order is set aside. Further, the fact a party disagrees with a court’s order does not mean the party can simply ignore the order. A party’s failure to comply with a court order is prima facie evidence of contempt.
Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. Hilltop View, 2014 IL App (4th) 140007.
