Peter Syregelas Wins Appeal – Making the Complex Simple

Our client’s insureds sought coverage for a heated and longstanding dispute between a homeowner’s association (“HOA”) and several of its residents.  Peter Syregelas first orchestrated a settlement calling for our insurer client to make a nominal payment in exchange for a release of all claims against it.  After the HOA breached the settlement agreement, Peter filed and won a motion for summary judgment declaring that our client did not owe a duty to defend or indemnify the HOA or its board members against the underlying litigation.  No appeal was taken.

Instead, the HOA attempted to file an amended underlying pleading asserting new claims against our client.  After the motion for leave to amend was denied, the HOA filed an entirely new complaint against our client.  Peter moved for judgment on the pleadings arguing that the original award of summary judgment precluded the new action pursuant to the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel.  The trial court granted Peter’s motion, denied the HOA’s motion to reconsider, and the Illinois Appellate Court affirmed the rulings.

Despite an onslaught of motion practice and attempts to distract the court from the issues at hand, Peter kept the courts focused on the issues and delivered a significant victory for our insurer client.  You can read the full Appellate Court opinion here: 2023 IL App (3d) 220089-U