at 576, 621 S.E.2d at 119 (quoting Estate of Blakely v. Federal Kemper Life Assurance Co., 267 Ill. App. 3d 100, 106, 640 N.E.2d 961, 966 (1994)). Moreover, scrivener's errors "are those which are 'demonstrably contradicted by all other documents,'" id. at 575, 621 S.E.2d at 119 (quoting Wellmore Coal Corp. v. Harman Mining Corp., 264 Va. 279, 283, 568 S.E.2d 671, 673 (2002)), and are "such errors as those evidenced in the writing that can be proven without parol evidence," id. at 576, 621 S.E.2d at 119 (citing Blakely, 267 Ill. App. 3d at 106, 640 N.E.2d at 966).
" 145 Ill. 2d R. 191(a). "According to Supreme Court Rule 191(a), a court must disregard conclusions in affidavits when adjudicating a summary judgment motion." Estate of Blakely v. Federal Kemper Life Assurance Co., 267 Ill. App. 3d 100, 105 (1994). Pursuant to the plain language of the rule and the applicable case law, this court must disregard the conclusions of Cagney and Romza that the medical findings were consistent with the alleged abuse.
Where a provision is "manifestly incongruous" with other provisions in the agreement, it is a scrivener's error, and reformation of the agreement to correct the error is proper. See Estate of Blakely, 267 Ill.App.3d 100, 107 (1994) (citingMetropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Henriksen, 6 Ill.App.2d 127, 134 (1955)).
Therefore the trial court acted properly in correcting the date. See Estate of Blakely v. Federal Kemper Life Assurance Co., 267 Ill. App. 3d 100, 107 (1994) (citing cases where a scrivener's error led to the reformation of an insurance contract). ¶ 28 The rules governing contract construction also govern the interpretation of a marital settlement agreement. In re Marriage of Hall, 404 Ill. App. 3d 160, 166 (2010).
Owens-Brockway is correct in its contention that "the mere filing of cross-motions does not compel the court to grant summary judgment in favor of one party or the other." Estate of Blakely v. Federal Kemper Life Assurance Co., 267 Ill. App.3d 100, 109, 640 N.E.2d 961, 968 (1994). However, we are not bound by the trial court's reasoning and may rely upon any ground present in the record to sustain the trial court's decision.
One of the out-of-circuit cases cited by Plaintiff addresses a fixed premium life insurance policy. Estate of Blakely v Fed. Kemper Life Assur. Co., 640 N.E.2d 961 (Ill.App.Ct. 1994). That case, however, is unlike the instant case.
Although it is tempting to term this a mere scrivener's error, we decline to do so at this juncture. Scriveners errors are sometimes entitled to reformation under Illinois law. Estate of Blakely v. Fed. Kemp. Life Assur. Co., 257 Ill. App. 3d 100, 106, 640 N.E.2d 961, 966 (2d Dist. 1994). For example, a missing decimal point is a scrivener's error.
Although the statute does not explicitly state that the amount given in the notice must be correct, courts in states with similar provisions have read that requirement into the statute. SeeTurner v. OM Financial Life Ins. Co ., 822 F.Supp.2d 633, 637–38 (W.D.La.2011) ; Estate of Blakely v. Federal Kemper Life Assurance Co. , 267 Ill.App.3d 100, 203 Ill.Dec. 811, 640 N.E.2d 961, 969 (1994). The only exception is if the discrepancy is a "harmless typographical error."
A claim for reformation fails if it rests on a mistake of law, as opposed to a mistake of fact. Estate of Blakely v. Federal Kemper Life Assurance Co., 267 Ill. App. 3d 100, 640 N.E.2d 961, 966, 203 Ill. Dec. 811 (Ill.App. 2d Dist. 1994); Wilcox v. Natural Gas Storage Co., 24 Ill.2d 509, 182 N.E.2d 158, 160 (Ill. 1962) (quoting Ambarann Corp. v. Old Ben Coal Corp., 395 Ill. 154, 69 N.E.2d 835, 841 (Ill. 1946); but seeIn re Estate of Hurst, 329 Ill. App. 3d 326, 769 N.E.2d 55, 60-62, 263 Ill. Dec. 853 (Ill.App. 4th Dist. 2002). The mistake of fact must relate to the time that the contract was drawn.
In Illinois, an insured is generally bound to know his policy's contents. Estate of Blakely v. Federal Kemper Life Assur. Co., 640 N.E.2d 961, 968 (Ill.App. 2d Dist. 1994). This general rule does not apply, however, where the insured has been misled by some act of the insurer.