Insurance Law Section
ILS Events Calendar

Nov

15

INS Council Meeting in Houston

10:00am Officers, 11:00am - 2:00pm Council. Location TBD

Jan

24

INS Council Meeting in Austin

10:00am Officers, 11:00am - 2:00pm Council. Location TBD

Apr

18

INS Council Meeting in Dallas

10:00am Officers, 11:00am - 2:00pm Council. Location TBD

Jun

27

INS Council Meeting in San Antonio

3:00pm Officers, 4:00pm - 6:00pm Council. Location: Hyatt Regency Hill Country Resort, 9800 Hyatt Resort Dr., San Antonio, TX 78251 (More)

Held in conjunction with the 15th Annual Advanced Insurance Law Course

 (Close)

 

Jun

28

15th Annual Advanced Insurance Law Course & Annual Membership Meeting

Hyatt Regency Hill Country Resort, 9800 Hyatt Resort Drive, San Antonio, TX 78251 (More)

The Henley v. Love Lesson: Where Experts Must Tread
by Blair Dancy

In addition to the complexities inherent in coverage law, coverage litigation brings its own set of challenges. One recurring question: When does a coverage case require an expert opinion? See, e.g., Don's Bldg. Supply, Inc. v. OneBeacon Ins. Co., 267 S.W.3d 20, 29 (Tex. 2008) (“Pinpointing the moment of injury retrospectively is sometimes difficult, but we cannot exalt ease of proof or administrative convenience over faithfulness to the policy language; our confined task is to review the contract, not revise it.”); Vines-Herrin Custom Homes, LLC v. Great Am. Lloyds Ins. Co., 357 S.W.3d 166, 173 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2011, pet. denied) (holding “expert testimony establishing the exact date of injury was not required to trigger the duty” under Don’s Building Supply, where the evidence showed the physical injury to the property indisputably occurred during one of two consecutive policy years covered by the same insurer); Swicegood v. Medical Protective Co., CIV.A.3:95-CV-0335-D, 2003 WL 22234928, at *15 (N.D. Tex. Sept. 19, 2003) (J. Fitzwater) (holding “the proof to be admitted at trial will consist of historical evidence from the Underlying Lawsuit and expert testimony to assist the jury in allocating or apportioning covered and non-covered damages,” involving mixed underlying claims of covered medical malpractice and uncovered romantic/sexual acts).

The Northe...(Continue)

 
 
Recent Decisions
Specific Allegations of Errors By Adjuster Sufficient to State a Claim  
Arrow Bolt & Electric, Inc. v. Landmark American Ins. Co. ND Tx 10/12/17—
Court grants remand of case removed on basis that adjuster was fraudulently joined, finding numerous specific allegations that the insurance adjuster committed errors in violation of the Texas Insurance Code sufficient to state a claim.
Court Denies Insurer's Motion to Exclude Expert Witness Because Discovery Extension Could Cure Any Resulting Prejudice  
Avneri v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co. ED Tx 10/10/17—
Court finds that failure to comply with Rule 26's disclosure requirements did not justify exclusion of expert testimony where extension of discovery could cure any resulting prejudice
Loss of Eye Not An Accident Under Accidental Death and Dismemberment and Life Insurance Policy  
Ramirez v. United of Omaha Life Insurance Co. 5th Cir 10/6/17—
Court affirms summary judgment for insurer that insured's loss of an eye as a result of an infection was not covered because the injury was not an "Accident" where "Accident" was defined to not include sickness or disease.
Court Grants Insured's Motion to Remand  
Hooper v. Allstate Texas Lloyds SD Tx 10/6/17—
Court finds that remand was proper due to split in authority among Texas federal district courts.
Insurer Prevails In Discovery Dispute  
In re Liberty County Mutual Insurance Co. Tx 1-Houston 10/5/17—
A district court abused its discretion when it allowed a claimant under a UM/UIM policy to take the deposition of the insurer's corporate representative prior to establishing the liability of the uninsured driver.
Award of Extra-Contractual Damages Affirmed  
State Farm Lloyds v. Vega Tx 13- Corpus/Edbrg 10/5/17—
An appellate court has rejected an insurer's contention that a jury's award of extra-contractual damages and attorney's fees was not supported by the evidence.
Insured not Bound by Proof of Loss Pre-Suit Notice Requirement  
Pamphile v. Allstate Texas Lloyds ND Tx 10/4/17—
Court finds that insurer could not enforce condition in homeowner's insurance policy because it did not suffer prejudice and the insured substantially complied with the policy terms.
Passenger in Stolen Car Cannot Claim Under UM/UIM Policy  
Salinas v. Progressive County Mutual Insurance Co. Tx 7-Amarillo 10/4/17—
An appellate court has affirmed summary judgment for a UM/UIM insurer after finding that a passenger in a stolen, insured vehicle was using the vehicle when the accident occurred.
Insurance Adjuster Fraudulently Joined, Again  
Mauldin v. Allstate Insurance Co. ND Tx 10/2/17—
Court finds in motion to remand proceedings that an adjuster was fraudulently joined by the insured for purposes of defeating diversity jurisdiction, denying remand and granting motion to dismiss claims against adjuster.
Carrier Not Liable Under Accidental Death Policy Because Insured Not Dead  
Badmus v. Mutual of Omaha Insurance Co. 5th Cir 10/2/17—
Fifth Circuit affirms grant of summary judgment in favor of insurer finding it not liable for all claims by alleged beneficiary of Accidental Death Policy because of evidence demonstrating insured was alive and had changed his name to that of beneficiary.
More Recent Decisions
 
 
Section News
Welcome the 2017-2018 Insurance Law Section Council & Officers

Join us in welcoming the Insurance Law Section Officers and Council Members for 2017 - 2018. New officers were elected by the Council and Council members were elected by Section members June 8, 2017 at the Section membership meeting during the 2017 Advanced Insurance Law Seminar in San A... (Continued)

More Section News