Thomas Polk and his wife Katarzyna Kurek-Polk were struck by a vehicle while helping another motorist on the roadside, leaving Thomas injured and Katarzyna dead. The couple held three underinsured motorist policies totaling $2 million in coverage: $1 million with AMCO Insurance, and $500,000 each with Progressive Northern Insurance and Secura Supreme Insurance. After receiving $100,000 from the at-fault driver and $800,000 from AMCO, Polk sought additional payments from Progressive and Secura.
Judge David Kirsch rejected Polk's argument that he could stack the UIM coverage limits despite clear anti-stacking provisions, writing that the policies 'explicitly authorize set-off by limiting liability to the maximum amount recoverable under any one policy issued by any insurer.' The court found the anti-stacking language unambiguous, noting that the Progressive policy states coverage 'shall be the highest limit of liability under any one policy' when multiple policies apply to the same accident.
The Northern District of Illinois had granted summary judgment to both insurance companies, concluding the policies provided per-accident rather than per-person coverage and that anti-stacking provisions capped recovery at the highest available limit of $1 million. The district court ordered Secura to pay Polk $100,000 to reach the total limit, while finding Progressive owed nothing. Polk appealed, arguing he could stack coverage and that the anti-stacking language was ambiguous.
The ruling reinforces insurers' ability to include anti-stacking provisions that prevent policyholders from combining multiple UIM policies to exceed the highest individual policy limit. The decision aligns with Illinois precedent and the state insurance code, which expressly permits anti-stacking language. The case demonstrates the importance of carefully reviewing policy language when purchasing multiple UIM coverages, as additional premiums may not necessarily increase total available benefits.