Articles Posted in Hail Claims

A Houston Division opinion discusses how to properly plead a lawsuit when an insurance company makes false statements.  The opinion is styled, Mt. Olive Missionary Baptist Church v. Underwriters at Lloyds.

Mt. Olive alleges a storm caused damage to the Church including damage to the roof, HVAC, windows, exterior, interior, ceilings, furnishings, and more.  After the storm a claim was filed under its insurance policy.  A third party adjuster, Herring, was assigned to investigate and adjust the claim.  Mt. Olive alleges that Herring failed to perform a thorough investigation of the claim, failed to prepare any estimates reflecting wind damage, and misrepresented that there was no damage to the Church.  The claim was denied.

Mt. Olive sued in state court and the case was removed to federal court.

Palo Pinto County insurance lawyers know that it is very difficult to appeal appraisal findings. A hail damage case from the Sherman Division, Eastern District illustrates this. The opinion is styled, Ronald Studer v. State Farm Lloyds.

The issue before the Court was whether the appraisal award should be set aside due to mistake. Plaintiff’s home was damaged due to hail stones during a storm. Plaintiff filed a claim for damage to his roof, gutters, siding, windows, skylight, and glass solarium with State Farm. State Farm hired Rimkus Engineering to inspect the solarium and give a cause of loss. This report is contained in the courts’ opinion.

A lawsuit filed by Studer resulted and State Farm invoked the appraisal provision in the insurance contract. An appraisal was conducted that was adverse to Studer and he filed a motion to set aside the appraisal and State Farm filed a motion for summary judgment based on the appraisal.

Lawyers who handle hail claims know the insurance companies prefer to fight lawsuits in Federal Court. Hail claims lawyers know one way of defeating the insurance company desire to be in Federal Court is by suing the adjuster. The Sherman Division, Eastern District issued an opinion illustrating how to Not file a lawsuit against an adjuster. The style of the opinion is Walters v. Metro. Lloyds Ins. Co.

The Walters residence sustained hail damage. The insurance company, Metropolitan, assigned Buchanan to adjust the claim. The claim was denied and Walters sued Metropolitan and Buchanan in State Court and the case was then moved to Federal Court by Metropolitan and Buchanan.

The only question at this point in the case is whether or not Buchanan was improperly joined as a defendant to defeat diversity jurisdiction.

Insurance lawyers would prefer to fight their cases in State Court rather than Federal Court. The opposite is true for insurance companies. Unfortunately, the insurance companies win most these battles for which court the case should be contested. A U.S. District Court, Galveston Division opinion illustrates some of the arguments. The case is styled, Lopez v. United Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co.

Lopez sued United in State Court alleging his home sustained water damage and that United failed to fully cover the damages. Suit was filed for violations of the Sections 541 and 542 of the Texas Insurance Code.

In order to defeat diversity jurisdiction, Lopez sued the adjuster, Bibiana Aguilar, assigned to handle the claim also.

Lawyers who handle hail damage claims can tell you that most of the time a person who has experienced hail damage and had their claim for benefits denied, needs to have an expert help them in the lawsuit that will result. An insured can always walk away and accept the insurance company denial but if you want to fight for the benefits you have paid for, an expert is well worth while.

Usually the roofer who will be doing the repairs will qualify as an expert and just as often he will not charge an expert fee or if he does, it will be minimal. An experienced insurance lawyer can tell you if your expert will be a good witness.

When an expert is not hired,or he does not do a good job, the result will be a disappointing loss like one of those described in the Insurance Journal in June, 2016. The Insurance Journal story is titled, Texas Insurers Hope Court Decisions Will Curtail Hail-Related Lawsuits.

The Insurance Journal published a good article in 2014 that gives a perspective on a jury trial. It is worthwhile reading for hail claims lawyers. The article is titled, Juror Witnesses Firsthand What the Hail Is Going on in Texas.

Alejandro Stolarski is a United States citizen who emigrated from Mexico. Stolarski resides in Dallas County. Like hundreds of other Dallas County residents each week, Stolarski received a notice in the mail for jury duty. But unlike most Dallas County residents, he was excited about being called to jury duty. Even better, Stolarksi was thrilled when he was selected to actually serve on a jury and, in his words, be an integral part of his adopted country’s legal system. Unfortunately, Stolarski was selected to serve as a juror in a Texas hail damage lawsuit.

The trial was representative of thousands of hail damage lawsuits presently pending in courts across Texas. The homeowner alleged that her roof was damaged in an April 2011 hail storm. Three months later, on June 23, 2011, she submitted a claim to State Farm. One week later, on June 29, 2011, State Farm inspected the reported damage. Shortly thereafter, State Farm issued payment for the cost to repair minor damage to the roof and other building components. The homeowner accepted the payment. It appeared to State Farm that the claim had been amicably resolved.

Lawyers who handle hail damage claims will want to read this article. It was published by the Insurance Journal in February 2015. It is titled, Attorneys, Insurers Facing Off Over Hail Litigation In Texas.

The vestiges of twin hailstorms that ravaged the south Texas coast in 2012 are now blowing through the halls of the Capitol in Austin.

Two of the state’s most-powerful lobbies, the insurance industry and trial lawyers, are gearing up for a fight over a push to ease penalties against companies that deny homeowners their hail-damage claims.