Articles Posted in Home Owners Policies

Homeowners in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Mansfield, Britton, Crowley, Burleson, Benbrook, Lillian, Godley, Glen Rose, Acton, Cresson, and other places in Texas, might be interested in this case.

This case is from the El Paso Court of Appeals and was decided on April 20, 2011. The style of the case is, Pamela Rust v. Texas Farmers Insurance Company.

This is a case where Pamela Rust brought suit seeking medical payment benefits from Texas Farmers Insurance Company under two homeowner policies that it had issued to Frank Kurosky, her father.

When someone in Grand Prairie, Fort Worth, Arlington, Dallas, Irving, Mesquite, Garland, Richardson, Carrollton, De Soto, or anywhere else in Texas leaves their house – is it vacant? What if you moved out to renovate it? What if you moved out while it was up for sale? What if you moved out while you had a temporary job out of town? What if you moved out to take care of a sick relative or friend?

When a house seems to be vacant and a loss occurs, the insurance company that insures the house will probably deny the claim under the “vacancy exclusion” in the insurance contract. Of course when this happens, an experienced Insurance Law Attorney needs to be consulted immediately. Whether the house is vacant, as that term is defined in the insurance contract and Texas courts, will determine whether or not there is coverage.

A case decided by the Court of Appeals, Waco, in 1971, is a good place to look for some guidance. The style of the case is, Germania Farm Mutual Aid Association v. Bobby D. Anderson and Lavern Anderson.

Structures owners in Weatherford, Aledo, Azle, Peaster, Hudson Oaks, Willow Park, Cresson, Mineral Wells, Millsap, Brock, Peaster, Springtown, and other places in Texas should know how insurance works when it comes to structures that are not “always” occupied.

The Houston Court of Appeals [1 Dist], decided a case in 1992, styled, Balram R. Jerry v. Kentucky Central Insurance Company. This case dealt with the trial court’s ruling in favor of the Kentucky Central Insurance Company (Kentucky). Here is some background.

In November 1985, Jerry and his wife, Valerie, moved to Utah for employment reasons. They retained ownership of their house in Harris County (the property). In April 1986, Valerie returned to the property and discovered it broken into and vandalized. Most of their property was taken or damaged. Six months later, Valerie’s parents visited the property and discovered it destroyed by fire. On November 11, 1986, Jerry reported the fire to Kentucky.

Property owners in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Pantego, Dalworthington Gardens, Crowley, Burleson, Lake Worth, Fort Worth, Weatherford, and other places in Texas who own homes and other building should know about the “vancancy clause” in their insurance policy.

Here is a 1969, case dealing with the vacancy clause in a homeowners insurance policy. It was decided by the Houston Court of Appeals and is styled, John J. Knoff et al. v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co.

Here are some facts of the case. Knoff and others sued United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co. (Fidelity) for money under a fire insurance policy. The policy excluded coverage when the house had been vacant beyond a period of thirty consecutive days. A fire occurred May 19, 1966, destroying the home. Here is some of the trial testimony.

Home owners in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Pantego, Fort Worth, Lake Worth, Dallas, Mansfield, De Soto, Duncanville, and other places in Texas would naturally wonder at times about exactly what types of coverages they have on their homeowners policies. Of course the answer is a lawerly “it depends.”

One case to look for in guidance for part of the answer is found in the case, Gomez v. Allstate Texas Lloyds Insurance Company. This is a 2007, Fort Worth Court of Appeals case. This is a liability insurance dispute concerning coverage under a homeowner’s policy for bodily injury arising out of a “four-wheeler” all terrain vehicle. One of the issues was the trial court’s interpretation of the scope of the policy’s recreational vehicle exception to the motor vehicle exclusion. Another issue was whether or not Allstate had a duty to defend the lawsuit that had been filed.

The Gomezes sued Jamy and Lara Johnson for injuries alleged to have occurred when Austin Gomez (6 years old) was a guest at the Johnson’s home, and Jamy placed Austin on a four-wheeler with no protective gear and allowed him to operate the vehicle. The lawsuit papers allege that Austin lost control and “went over an embankment.” The lawsuit alleges several things that the Johnson’s did wrong in contributing to the cause of this accident.