Cmty. Found. for Jewish Educ. v. Fed. Ins. Co.

Cmty. Found. for Jewish Educ. v. Fed. Ins. Co.

Opinion

 [*463] ORDER

The Community Foundation for Jewish Education sued the Federal Insurance Company, seeking coverage under a claims-made insurance policy. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment, and the district court granted summary judgment to the defendant. The Community Foundation for Jewish Education appeals, and we affirm.

This case provides an unfortunate example of litigation about litigation. Prior to September [**2]  1993, the Board of Jewish Education (the "Board") was the central agency providing Jewish education in the Chicago area; the Board assisted synagogues and day schools which offered educational services in the community. The Board's largest source of funding was the Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago ("Federation"), which distributes funds raised by the Jewish United Fund of Metropolitan Chicago.

In 1993, the Board, the Federation, and three of the Jewish religious movements (conservative, reform, and reconstructionist), formed a partnership called the Community Foundation for Jewish Education (the "Foundation"). This partnership sought to forge a closer relationship between the Board and the three religious movements and to more effectively provide educational services to the Jewish community. The Board rejected a proposal to merge with the Foundation, instead entering into a three-year partnership agreement with the Foundation. After the three-year term expired, the parties would decide whether to merge or proceed as separate entities.

 [*464]  Pursuant to this plan, on January 1, 1994, the Foundation and Board entered into five contracts which governed the partnership: the Frank [**3]  G. Marshall Multi-Media Resource Center Operating Agreement; the Early Childhood Centers Operating Agreement; the Administrative Services Agreement; the Programming Agreement; and the Equipment and Premises Agreement. These contracts provided that the Foundation would take over the Board's functions through June 30, 1996. Apparently the Board was not happy with the partnership because before the end of the three-year period, it informed the Foundation that it did not want to continue the partnership beyond June 30, 1996.

Correspondence between the parties in May and June of 1996 indicates that there was disagreement over the process of terminating the partnership, and on March 18, 1997, the Board filed suit in Illinois Circuit Court against the Foundation (the "Board lawsuit"). In its original complaint, the Board alleged that the Foundation had breached the Equipment and Premises Agreement, claiming that the Foundation had failed to make required payments on two loans, with damages of $ 20,501.48, plus interest. The Foundation contended that the Board had waived its right to these payments.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.