Davidson v. Comet Casualty Co. (1980), 89 Ill. App.3d 720, 723, 412 N.E.2d 19. • 2 Independent insurance agents possess a certain duality which allows them to act as both agents and brokers. ( Zannini v. Reliance Insurance Co. (1990), 206 Ill. App.3d 910, 916, 565 N.E.2d 118, appeal allowed (1991), 137 Ill.2d 673.) Although earlier case law drew a distinction between insurance agents and insurance brokers (see, e.g., DeGraw v. State Security Insurance Co. (1976), 40 Ill. App.3d 26, 33, 351 N.E.2d 302; Lynn v. Village of West City (1976), 36 Ill. App.3d 561, 564-65, 345 N.E.2d 172; Galiher v. Spates (1970), 129 Ill. App.2d 204, 206, 262 N.E.2d 626), a person's conduct and not title determines the relationship between the independent insurance agent, the insured and the insurer. ( Zannini, 206 Ill. App.3d at 916, 565 N.E.2d at 122; Krause v. Pekin Life Insurance Co. (1990), 194 Ill. App.3d 798, 805, 551 N.E.2d 395.) Under certain circumstances, an independent insurance agent may be an agent of both the insured and the insurer.
The appellate court affirmed. 206 Ill. App.3d 910. For the reasons stated below, we reverse the judgments of the appellate and circuit courts and remand this matter for further proceedings.
Under Illinois law an independent insurance agent may be the agent for the insurer (i.e., insurance agent) for certain purposes, the agent of the insured (i.e., insurance broker), or the agent of both parties in certain instances. Zannini v. Reliance Ins. Co., 206 Ill. App.3d 910, 915 (1990). See note 2, supra.