No. 5-99-0830 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ... - Appellate.net

to its “pre-loss condition.” DX 1244 at 16. Most of the policies also expressly provided that
State Farm could meet that obligation by specifying non-OEM repair parts:
We will include in the estimate parts sufficient to restore a vehicle to its pre-loss
condition. You agree with us that such parts may include either parts furnished by
the vehicle’s manufacturer or parts from other sources including non-original
equipment manufacturers.
Id. (emphasis added).
Melding the “pre-loss condition” and “like kind and quality” language from different
policies, the circuit court instructed the jury at the start and close of the case that “the State
Farm policies and insurance contracts allow State Farm to specify [non-OEM parts] . . . so
long as the crash parts are of like kind and quality which restore the damaged vehicle to its
pre-loss condition.” R. 4426; A. 59-60. The court defined “pre-loss condition” as the
“condition of the vehicle immediately before the time it is damaged.” A. 60. The court did
not mention policies purchased by class members in five states that did not use either the
“pre-loss condition” or the “like kind and quality” language, PX 1200-1 at tabs 23, 53-56,
and barred State Farm from introducing any “evidence regarding differences in State Farm’s
contractual obligations towards members of the class.” C. 28970; see also C. 28980.
3. Varying State Regulations. Like other insurance practices, the specification of
non-OEM parts is not regulated on a uniform, national level. Instead, it is regulated by each
state’s department of insurance under laws and regulations that vary from state to state. No
state bars specification of non-OEM parts, and most expressly permit it subject to regulation.
Thirty states regulate insurers’ disclosures regarding non-OEM parts, usually requiring
-5-