Fire Insurance Exchange v. Bell

Bell (plaintiff) was injured in a house fire covered by a homeowner's policy issued by Fire Insurance Exchange, whose counsel at Ice Miller (defendants) told Bell's attorney the policy limit was $100,000, even though an insurance-company employee had told the same lawyer the actual limit was $300,000. Bell settled for $100,000 and later sued Ice Miller and its lawyer upon learning the truth. The insurer moved for summary judgment, arguing Bell's own attorney, an equally sophisticated adversary with access to discovery, had no legal right to simply rely on opposing counsel's representation about the policy limit. The trial court denied summary judgment, the court of appeals affirmed, and the insurer sought review.