Susan Graham

Susan Nerney Graham received her undergraduate degree from the University of Notre Dame in 1989 and graduated from Loyola University Chicago School of Law in 1994. Ms. Graham devotes her practice to the defense of liability claims and to the prosecution and defense of declaratory judgment actions in insurance coverage disputes. She has extensive civil litigation experience, handling cases from the inception of a lawsuit to motion practice, arbitration, trial and appeal. She has tried over 50 cases to jury verdict and has tried multiple chancery cases to declaratory judgment. Ms. Graham has frequently represented insurers in binding arbitration of uninsured/underinsured motorist claims as well as in mediation. Ms. Graham has secured numerous judgments favorable to clients through dispositive motions in chancery and state courts. She is an active member of the Chicago Bar Association, serving as an Executive member of the Judicial Evaluation Committee. She is a chair-qualified arbitrator for the Cook County Municipal arbitration program. Ms. Graham can be contacted at sgraham@lcllaw.com

Admitted:
Illinois
New York
Kansas

Affiliations:
Chicago Bar Association
Loyola University Chicago School of Law, Board of Governors

Areas of Practice:
Insurance Law
Personal Injury – Defense
Coverage
Breach of contract
Arbitration
Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist
Subrogation

Litigation: 100% of practice devoted to litigation

Representative Cases:

  • Secured a declaratory judgment in favor of an automobile insurer after a trial in which the chancery court found that a claimant seeking uninsured motorist benefits had not met her burden of establishing that she was either an “insured” or a “relative” of an insured. The court also found that the claimant breached certain conditions of the policy. Arbitration of the claimant’s uninsured motorist claim was permanently stayed.


  • Defended small business owner at a trial in which the plaintiffs, a retired dentist and his wife, sought the repayment of property damage and medical payments after an accident in which the defendant struck the rear of plaintiffs’ vehicle at a high speed. Verdict for defendant.


  • Defended an insurer named as a third-party garnishee/respondent in post-judgment proceedings after judgment was entered against its insured. The court entered summary judgment in favor of the insurer, finding that the insurer did not receive actual notice of the lawsuit before judgment was entered. The judgment against the insured was vacated and the citation to discover assets against the insurer was dismissed.


  • Represented automobile insurer in a declaratory judgment matter in which the chancery court entered summary judgment in favor of the insurer, finding that the named driver exclusion on the policy was valid as to one of the named insureds. The insurer owed no duty to defend, indemnify or otherwise provide coverage or benefits in any claim arising from the loss.


  • Defended taxicab driver in a case where the plaintiff, a dentist, claimed that the taxicab driver failed to yield in an intersection controlled by a stop sign. Verdict for the defendant.


  • Represented an insurer in an interpleader action where the insurer was discharged from any obligation to pay further or additional amounts under the liability provisions of the policy when the court found that the applicable limits of the policy were exhausted.


  • Represented automobile insurer in a declaratory judgment matter in which the chancery court entered summary judgment in favor of the insurer. The court declared that the insurer was not obligated to defend or indemnify the driver of an insured vehicle in regard to any liability claim because, as a non-permissive user, the driver did not meet the policy definition for “Persons Insured.”


  • Defended an insurer in a lawsuit brought by a car dealership. The appellate court entered judgment in favor of the insurer, ruling that the plaintiff dealership was not entitled to recover comprehensive or collision benefits for the total loss of a newly-sold vehicle because the plaintiff did not qualify as an insured, a lien holder or a loss payee on the driver’s insurance policy at the time of the accident.