Lonnie LuPardus

829 Creekside Drive

Gardner, KS 66030
(913) 912 2255
lupardusvshomesite@gmail.com (outgoing)
22CV6473@gmail.com (incoming)

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF KANSAS, COUNTY OF JOHNSON

LONNIE LUPARDUS
Respondent .

&. Case NO: 22CV06473

HOMESITE INDEMNITY CO AMERICAN

FAMILY INSURANCE
Petitioner.

REQUEST FOR DECLARATORY JUDGEMENT CONCERNING DUTY TO DEFEND AND

REQUEST FOR PERMISSION TO FILE COMPLAINT BASED ON POLICY

NON-RENEWAL

NOW COMES the respondent LONNIE LUPARDUS ("LuPardus") pro se against petitioners

HOMESITE INDEMNITY COMPANY ("Homesite") and third party AMERICAN FAMILY

INSURANCE ("AFICS") to this action by and through their counsel, TODD. E. SHADID and

CHRISTOPHER A. McELGUNNN of Klenda Austerman L.L.C., requesting declaratory judgment

over Homesite’s Duty to Defend its Insured against personal liability claims and request for

permission to file a complaint with the Kansas Insurance Department over the reasoning that Homesite

hsa now submitted to LuPardus which will end his coverage of insurance on April, 26th 2023.

1
Clerk of the District Court, Johnson County Kansas
2/23/2023 13:15:59 MJ
 FACTS

On December 20th, 2022 Homesite Insurance filed a suit in Johnson County Court against its

insured LuPardus, seeking for the courts to grant it relief by having the court enter judgment declaring

that Homesite and AFICS have satisfied the terms and conditions of Policy #1 and policy #2 and do

not afford any more benefits coverage or benefits to LuPardus. Homesite has already requested a

temporary and permanent injunction against LuPardus seeking to prohibit him from having any

contact with his Insurer and their subsidiaries, which would breach the contract between Homesite and

LuPardus if the courts were to grant such relief. Homesite has also claimed LuPardus has caused them

financial harm by way of loss of staff and loss of business relationships which allegedly cannot be

easily ascertained in monetary value but does have the possibility of being well over one-hundred

thousand dollars ($100,000.00 USD) per Homesite’s statement of “any aware would more than likely

be over what LuPardus could pay,” i.e., over LuPardus’ policy coverage maximum which is

($100,000.00 USD). LuPardus has filed claim with his Insurer Homesite as there is a clear possibilities

that LuPardus could be potentially liable to Homesite for it’s claims it has made, but Homesite has

refused to honor its Duty to Defend its insured claiming it does not seek any financial reimbursement

from LuPardus. However, based on the ending sentence in Homesite’s petition, it also seeks relief by

stating “such other and further relief as the Court deems just and equitable;” which triggers coverage

for Homesite’s Duty to Defend under the Personal Liability section of the contract as now Homesite

has opened the door requesting the court to grant relief “as the court deems just and equitable” which

could potentially include monetary liability to the Insured. Concluding that when a petition alleges

both acts that are covered and acts that are not, "these alleged facts give rise to the potential for

liability, and the duty to defend arises"” Bankwest V. Fidelity Deposit Co., Maryland As a general

2
Clerk of the District Court, Johnson County Kansas
2/23/2023 13:15:59 MJ
rule, the interpretation or construction and meaning and legal effect of written instruments are matters

of law exclusively for the court and not questions of fact for determination by the jury. Federal Land

Bank of Wichita v. Krug Insurance policies are to be enforced as written so long as the terms do not

conflict with pertinent statutes or public policy. Where terms are ambiguous, the policy shall be

construed to mean what a reasonable person in the position of the insured would have understood

them to mean. A policy is not ambiguous, however, unless there is genuine uncertainty as to which of

two or more possible meanings is proper. House v. American Fam. Mut. Ins. Co. Under the present

code of civil procedure, an insurer must look beyond the effect of the pleadings and must consider any

facts brought to its attention or any facts which it could reasonably discover in determining whether it

has a duty to defend. If those facts give rise to a "potential of liability," even if remote, under the

policy, the insurer bears a duty to defend. MGM, Inc. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. The duty to defend rests

primarily on the possibility that coverage exists, and the possibility of coverage must be determined by

a good faith analysis of all information the insurer may know or could have reasonably ascertained. If

ambiguities in coverage, including exclusionary clauses, are judicially determined against the insurer,

the ultimate result controls the insurer's duty to defend. Spruill Motors, Inc. V. Universal Underwriters

Ins. Co.1

Also, on February 23rd 2023, Homesite sent LuPardus a Notice of Cancellation (Ex. 1) claiming that

Homesite is unable to renew the policy of insurance for the upcoming term as the policy no longer

meets their underwriting guidelines, citing the specific reasons as follows: “NONRENEWAL: Any

policy where an insured’s behavior is intended to injure, threaten, or financially harm the Company or

any of its employees, or any behavior indicating that trust and conference required for the

1
https://www.independentagent.com/vu/SiteAssets/Pages/checklist/checklist/Duty-to-Defend-State-List.pdf

3
Clerk of the District Court, Johnson County Kansas
2/23/2023 13:15:59 MJ
continuation of an insurance relationship no longer exist.” (Ex. 2) Homesite with it’s statement

claiming financial harm has yet again triggered the duty to defend as the duty rest primarily on the

possibility that coverage exist:

SECTION II – LIABILITY COVERAGES

A. Coverage E – Personal Liability If a claim is made or a suit is brought against an

"insured" for damages because of "bodily injury" or "property damage" caused by an

"occurrence" to which this coverage applies, we will: 1. Pay up to our limit of liability for the

damages for which an "insured" is legally liable. Damages include prejudgment interest

awarded against an "insured"; and 2. Provide a defense at our expense by counsel of

our choice, even if the suit is groundless, false or fraudulent. We may investigate and settle any

claim or suit that we decide is appropriate. Our duty to settle or defend ends when our limit of

liability for the "occurrence" has been exhausted by payment of a judgment or settlement.

The duty to defend rests primarily on the possibility that coverage exists, and the possibility of

coverage must be determined by a good faith analysis of all information the insurer may know or

could have reasonably ascertained. If ambiguities in coverage, including exclusionary clauses, are

judicially determined against the insurer, the ultimate result controls the insurer's duty to defend.

Spruill Motors, Inc. V. Universal Underwriters Ins. Co

RELIEF

With the statements and evidence provided LuPardus request declaratory judgment from the

court affirming his request that the Duty to Defend has been triggered in LuPardus’ policy, and that

4
Clerk of the District Court, Johnson County Kansas
2/23/2023 13:15:59 MJ
Homesite be required to uphold their contractual duties to defend LuPardus in a suit in which liability

has become a clear possibility. LuPardus also ask leave of the court to file a complaint with the Kansas

Insurance Department, which is the regulator of Insurance for the State of Kansas, concerning the

notice of cancellation/non-renewal as Homesite is retaliating against their insured for filing claims in

which Homesite has/will be found liable for.

Respectfully,

/s/ Lonnie LuPardus

Certificate of Service

I, Lonnie LuPardus, certify that on Feb 23, 2023 I submitted this request for zoom link

to the following:

ADA for Judge Mason: Stacy.Crist@jocogov.org

Todd. Shadid - Klenda Austerman LLC 1600 Epic Center | 301 N Main Wichita KS 67202

Chris McElgunn - Klenda Austerman LLC 1600 Epic CEnter | 301 N Main Wichita, KS 67202

/s/ Lonnie LuPardus

829 Creekside Drive
Gardner, KS 66030

5
Clerk of the District Court, Johnson County Kansas
2/23/2023 13:15:59 MJ