The lawsuit originally advanced several theories, including allegations that Progressive violated the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, breached its contract with policyholders, and breached the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing. But by the time the case reached the class certification stage, the court had already trimmed most of those theories. Earlier in the litigation, the court dismissed claims that Progressive misrepresented the Projected Sold Adjustment and that it violated the Illinois Total-Loss Regulation, giving the plaintiffs a chance to fix the deficiencies. They did not. The court also blocked the plaintiffs from reviving a regulatory violation theory for their breach of contract claims after they had expressly told the court in earlier filings that those claims had nothing to do with the regulation. When the plaintiffs later tried to reverse that position, the court shut the door, noting that allowing such a late pivot would unfairly burden Progressive, which had already completed discovery without any reason to explore that issue.
