Skip to Navigation
The Collaborative Clearinghouse for Lawsuits and Other Claims Against ACE Group Insurance Companies

FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY et al v. ELECTROLUX HOME PRODUCTS, INC.

ATTENTION: It is possible that this information may no longer be current and therefore may be inaccurate. The index contains both open and closed cases and is not a complete list of cases in which an ACE Insurance Group company is involved. This information is provided to give interested persons an idea of the issues disputed in the indexed cases. For a full understanding of a case, one should read the rest of the court file, including the response. For the most up-to-date and complete information on a case, visit www.pacer.gov or contact the clerk of the relevant court.

Case Number: 
1:15-cv-01032 Search Pacer
ACE Group party(s): 
Opposing Party: 
Federal Insurance Company
Court Type: 
Federal
US District Court: 
Northern District of Illinois
Date Filed: 
Jan 30 2015

COMPLAINT
Plaintiffs, ACE American Insurance Company, Lexington Insurance Company, and
Federal Insurance Company, as subrogees of AM Trio Tower LLC, by and through their
undersigned attorneys, Cozen O’Connor, and for their Complaint against Defendant Electrolux
Home Products, Inc., allege the following:

PARTIES
1. Plaintiff, Federal Insurance Company (“Federal”), is an Indiana corporation duly
authorized to do business in the State of Illinois with a principal place o f business in Warren,
New Jersey.
2. Plaintiff, ACE American Insurance Company (“ACE”), is a Pennsylvania
corporation duly authorized to do business in the State of Illinois with a principal place of
business in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
3. Plaintiff, Lexington Insurance Company (“Lexington”), is a Delaware corporation
duly authorized to do business in the State of Illinois with a principal place of business in
Boston, Massachusetts.
4. At all times material herein, AM Trio Tower LLC (“AM Trio Tower”) was the
owner o f the residential apartment property located at 670 Wyman Street, Chicago, Illinois.
5. At all times material herein, AM Trio Tower was insured through policies of
insurance issued by the plaintiffs, ACE policy number CXD3786897-8, Lexington policy
number 19946549, and Federal policy number 3589-12-95, which insured them on a pro-rated
basis against, inter alia, damages to real and business personal property.
6. Defendant, Electrolux Home Products, Inc., is a corporation organized and
existing under the laws o f the State o f Delaware, with a principal place of business located at
10200 David Taylor Drive, Charlotte, North Carolina 28262. At all times material herein,
Electrolux Home Products, Inc. was engaged in the design, manufacture, assembly, sale and/or
supply o f clothes dryers for the distribution in the United States.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE
7. The jurisdiction of this Court is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332, as this
action is between citizens of different states and the amount in controversy, exclusive of interest
and costs, exceeds the sum o f $75,000.00.
8. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391, as a substantial part
of the events giving rise to the claims at issue occurred within this District and Defendant,
Electrolux Home Products, Inc. is subject to personal jurisdiction within this District.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
9. On or about March 3, 2014, AM Trio Tower the owner o f a gas clothes dryer that
was manufactured, designed, assembled and/or supplied by Electrolux.
10. The dryer was installed in apartment #1104 at 670 W. Wyman Street, Chicago,
Illinois. The apartment was leased to and occupied by tenant, Jay Key.
11. On March 3, 2014, a fire originated in the dryer due to the defective condition of
the Electrolux dryer, which fire caused extensive damage to the real and business personal
property of AM Trio Tower and caused them to sustain extra expenses.
12. At all times material herein, the Electrolux dryer was employed for the use for
which it was intended, in the absence of any abuse and/or misuse.
13. As a result o f the fire referred to above, and pursuant to the aforesaid policies of
insurance. Plaintiffs have paid AM Trio Tower the fair and reasonable cost of repairing and/or
replacing the damaged real and business personal property they incurred on account o f the fire.
14. In furtherance of its duties under Policies 3589-12-95, CXD3786897-8, and
019946549, Federal, ACE, and Lexington have made payments, on or about July 1, 2014, for the
aforesaid losses in the amount of $143,682.11 (including AM Trio Tower’s $10,000 deductible)
and has received an assignment o f subrogation rights from its insured. Accordingly, Federal,
ACE, and Lexington are now the actual bona fide subrogees of AM Trio Tower LLC with
respect to the rights and interests of AM Trio Tower LLC arising from the subject loss. (See Ex.
A)

COUNT 1
NEGLIGENCE v. ELECTROLUX
15. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference herein the averments in paragraphs 1 through
14 as though each were fully set forth at length herein.
16. The fire referred to above and consequent damage and destruction to the AM Trio
Tower’s property was caused by the negligence, carelessness, gross negligence and negligent
omissions o f the defendant, its agents, servants and/or employees in:
(a) improperly designing a dryer which allowed lint to come in contact with a
competent ignition source;
(b) designing a dryer that allows the lint from clothes to collect in areas within
the dryer cabinet, where it can then be ignited by the flame produced by
the burner assembly;
(c) designing a dryer that allows lint to collect in an area where it cannot be
cleaned by a user, and where the accumulated lint is potentially ignitable
by the flame from the burner assembly;
(d) designing a dryer that failed to provide for containment o f potential lint
fires in the area o f the burner assembly;
(e) failing to include appropriate and necessary warnings, including warnings
on the dryer cabinet that the interior cabinet must be professionally
cleaned every 18 months;
(f) failing to include warnings in the dryer user manual that lint can
accumulate between the deflector and the rear heat diffuser, and about the
need to remove lint from this area; and
(g) supplying a defectively manufactured and/or designed product which it
knew or should have known subjected insureds’ property to an
unreasonable risk o f harm.
17. By reason o f the aforesaid negligence, carelessness, gross negligence and
negligent omissions of defendant, the fire referred to in paragraph 11 took place and resulted in
damage and destruction to plaintiffs’ insured’s property.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, ACE American Insurance Company, Lexington Insurance
Company, and Federal Insurance Company as subrogees o f AM Trio Tower, respectfully request
this Honorable Court enter judgment against Defendant in the amount of or in excess of
$143,682.11, plus costs and other relief that this Court deems just.

COUNT II
PRODUCTS LIABILITY v. ELECTROLUX
18. Plaintiffs incorporates by reference the averments in paragraphs 1 through 14 as
though each were fully set forth at length herein.
19. Defendant, Electrolux, by and through its agents, employees, and/or servants, is
the manufacturer, designer, assembler and seller of the subject dryer, and as such, is strictly
liable for any defects or unreasonably dangerous conditions with respect to the subject dryer.
20. The subject dryer was defective and in an unreasonably dangerous condition at
the time it left the Electrolux’s possession and control insofar as it:
(a) was defectively designed to allow lint to come in contact with a competent
ignition source;
(b) was defectively designed to allow the lint from clothes to collect in areas
within the dryer cabinet, where it can then be ignited by the flame
produced by the burner assembly;
(c) was defectively designed to allow lint to collect in an area where it cannot
be cleaned by a user, and where the accumulated lint is potentially
ignitable by the flame from the burner assembly;
(d) designing a dryer that failed to provide for containment of potential lint
fires in the area of the burner assembly;
(e) failed to include appropriate and necessary warnings, including warnings
on the dryer cabinet that the interior cabinet must be professionally
cleaned every 18 months;
(f) failed to include warnings in the dryer user manual that lint can
accumulate between the deflector and the rear heat diffuser, and about the
need to remove lint from this area; and
(g) was a defectively manufactured and/or designed product that subjected
insureds’ property to a foreseeable unreasonable risk of harm.
21. The subject dryer reached AM Trio Tower without substantial alteration or
change in its condition.
22. At the time of the occurrence, the subject dryer was being used in a reasonably
expectable and anticipated way, as was intended by Defendant, Electrolux, and all reasonable
consumers.
23. The defective and unreasonably dangerous condition and subsequent
malfunctioning of the subject dryer was the direct and proximate cause of the real and business
personal property damages sustained by AM Trio Tower.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, ACE American Insurance Company, Lexington Insurance
Company, and Federal Insurance Company as subrogees of AM Trio Tower, respectfully request
this Honorable Court enter judgment against Defendant in the amount of or in excess of
$143,682.11, plus costs and other relief that this Court deems just.

COUNT III
BREACH OF WARRANTY v. ELECTROLUX
24. Plaintiffs incorporates by reference herein the averments in paragraphs 1 through
14 as though each were fully set forth at length herein.
25. In designing, manufacturing, assembling and/or selling the subject dryer,
Defendant, Electrolux, either expressly and/or impliedly warranted that the subject dryer would
be merchantable and/or fit for a particular purpose.
26. Defendant, Electrolux, breached the warranties of merchantability and/or fitness
for a particular purpose as heretofore set forth in Counts I and II of the Complaint, which are
incorporated herein as though fully set forth.
27. Plaintiffs have notified Electrolux Home Products, Inc. o f this fire and requested
that Defendant, Electrolux, honor its warranty, but Defendant, Electrolux, has not done so.
28. The breaches o f warranty by Defendant, Electrolux, were the direct and proximate
cause of the real and business personal property damages sustained by AM Trio Tower.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, ACE American Insurance Company, Lexington Insurance
Company, and Federal Insurance Company as subrogees of AM Trio Tower, respectfully request
this Honorable Court enter judgment against Defendant in the amount of or in excess of
$143,682.11, plus costs and other relief that this Court deems just.

ASSIGNMENT AND SUBROGATION RECEIPT
Received from Federal Insurance Company, ACE American Insurance Company, and
Lexington Insurance Company ( The Companies) the sum of One Hundred Thirty-Three
Thousand Six Hundred and Eighty-Two Dollars and Eleven Cents ($133,682.11), after
consideration of the Ten Thousand Dollar ($10,000) deductible, in full payment, release and
discharge of all claims and demands of the undersigned, AM Trio Tower LLC (hereinafter
“Insured”), against the said Companies under policies of insurance, arising from or in connection
with any loss or damage by reason of a fire at the Trio Apartments, Apt. 1104, 670 Wyman
Street, Chicago, Illinois, which loss and damage arose or occurred on or about March 3, 2014
and was assigned claim numbers 022614002690; JY14J0102817; 7250352165US .
In consideration of the payment received, the insured hereby assigns, transfers and sets
over to the Companies any and all claims and/or legal title to all causes of action of whatsoever
kind and nature including its Deductible claim which the Insured now has, or may hereafter
have, to recover against any person or persons or legal entities as a result of said occurrence and
loss above described, the Insured agrees that the Companies may enforce the same in such
manner and shall be necessary or appropriate for the use and benefit of the Companies, either in
their own names or in the name of the Insured, that the Insured shall furnish such papers,
information or evidence as shall be within the Insured’s possession or control for the purpose of
enforcing such claim, demand or cause of action; but it is expressly understood that the Insured
is to be saved harmless from costs in any such proceedings. The Companies shall have control
over the litigation and the sole right and discretion to enter into any resolution or settlement it
deems advisable and reasonable with respect to the above action. Any settlements authorized by
the Companies in this claim shall be binding on AM Trio Tower LLC, its past, present, and
Case: l:15-cv-01032 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/30/15 Page 9 of 9 PagelD #:9
future limited and general partners, officers and directors, stockholders, attorneys, servants,
representatives, employees, subsidiaries, affiliates, partners, predecessors and successors in
interest, assigns, and all other persons, firms or corporations with whom any of the fonner have
been, are now or may hereafter be affiliated and AM Trio Tower LLC further agrees to cooperate
in the execution of any settlement documents.
The Insured covenants that no release or settlement of any such claim, demand or cause
of action has been made and that no such settlement will be made nor release given by the
Insured without the written consent of the Company.

The provided text is an excerpt from a document filed in this case. For a full understanding of the case, one should read the complete court file, including the response.

Javascript is required to view this map.