Value of Claim

Insurance Claims And Attorney Fees

July 1, 2014 | Mark S. Humphreys

Dallas area insurance attorneys will eventually try a case wherein, part of the case is won and part is lost. If this happens, does it affect an award of attorney fees? This question is answered in a Fort Worth Court of Appeals case opinion issued in 2014. The style of the case is, Farmers Group v. Poteet. The opinion is long and deals with many other issues. Here is the relevant part.

After a November 2002 discharge of smoke and soot from her heating and air-conditioning system, Poteet reported her claim to Farmers, which investigated and initially determined that the discharge of smoke and soot was caused by cracked heat exchangers in the home’s heating system and that the loss was covered under Poteet’s homeowners’ policy as “sudden and accidental damage from smoke.” Farmers paid for remediation and repair, including temporarily relocating Poteet and her daughter to a hotel during the process, cleaning and replacing furniture and carpet, repainting of the ceiling, and cleaning the home’s walls and contents.

Poteet was dissatisfied with the remediation and cleaning efforts and claimed that continued presence of soot in the air of the home was causing her and her daughter to experience respiratory problems and rendered the home uninhabitable. Poteet hired a Certified Industrial Hygienist, Robert Miller, to investigate whether soot was still present in the home. Miller determined there was still soot present in the house.

Insurance Claims – Proving Damages

May 15, 2014 | Mark S. Humphreys

Lake Worth insurance lawyers need to know this case. It is a 1971 opinion issued by the Texas Supreme Court. It’s style is, Travelers Indemnity Co. v. McKillip. Here is the relevant information.

Troy L. McKillip and wife brought this action against the Travelers Indemnity Co. to recover for damages to their poultry house under the terms of a policy of insurance issued by that Company. After a trial to a jury, respondents were awarded a recovery for $7,450.

The insureds were the owners of a turkey farm in Eastland County, which included two sheet metal buildings and a wooden building used as conditioning houses for breeder turkeys. The one damaged building was of steel truss type construction, 408 feet long by 40 feet wide. The other two buildings, located some distance from the damaged building, were undamaged. The second building was essentially of the same construction as the damaged building and was some fifty feet shorter. The third building was of wooden construction.

Loss Of Use Claims

March 6, 2014 | Mark S. Humphreys

Dallas insurance lawyers need to know this recent court decision regarding “loss of use” damages. It is a Fort Worth Court of Appeals decision issued in January 2014. The style of the case is, Morrison V. Campbell. Here is some of the relevant information.

In this agreed interlocutory appeal, Morrison appealed from the trial court’s denial of his motion for summary judgment on the claim for loss of use damages brought against him by Campbell. Morrison’s vehicle struck Campbell’s motorcycle in an accident, and the motorcycle was damaged. Morrison argued that loss of use damages are not available to Campbell because his motorcycle was declared a total loss. Because this court held that damages for loss of use are available in total loss cases when the insurer unreasonably delays payment of a claim, it affirmed the trial court’s denial of the motion for summary judgment.

The accident that gave rise to this suit occurred on October 23, 2009. On June 22, 2010, Morrison’s insurance carrier (Insurer) sent a letter to Campbell’s attorney denying Campbell’s claim based on its determination that Campbell was at fault for the accident because of “faulty evasive action & following too closely.”

Total Loss Of Vehicle

January 30, 2014 | Mark S. Humphreys

Mineral Wells insurance attorneys need to be able to discuss with clients who have wrecked their car, how an insurance company decides whether or not a car is a total loss or should be repaired.

When and whether a vehicle involved in a collision is considered to be “totaled” for first-party insurance purposes is an issue of great angst and confusion for most consumers. We hear horror stories about older, functioning automobiles being “totaled” simply because the frame is bent or other seemingly minor and hidden damage occurs. Even insurance professionals can get turned around navigating the maze of rules and regulations regarding the act of “totaling” a vehicle under a policy. But it needn’t be all that complicated.

Typically, cars are considered to be “totaled” when the cost to repair the vehicle is higher than the actual cash value (ACV) of the vehicle. Practically speaking, however, it is not always practical to repair a vehicle, even if the cost of repair is less than its ACV. A vehicle worth $4,000 requiring $3,000 in repairs might be considered “totaled” by an insurer even though the cost of repair is less than its value before the accident. Insurance companies will typically consider such a vehicle to be a total loss, even though the repairs are only 75 percent of ACV.

Evidence Of Claim Value

October 12, 2013 | Mark S. Humphreys

Fort Worth insurance lawyers have to be able to prove, with evidence, the value of claims presented.

The Corpus Christi Court of Appeals issued an opinion that dealt with evidence in a claim in September of 2013. The style of the case is, Hennen v. Allstate.

The case is an appeal from a summary judgment in favor of Allstate. Here is some of the analysis made by the Court in upholding the judgment in favor of Allstate.

Potential Claim Recovery

August 1, 2013 | Mark S. Humphreys

Weatherford Texas insurance lawyers need to be able to discuss with clients the value associated with their claim.

The Texas Insurance Code, Section 541.152, tells us that a winning claimant is entitled to:

1) actual damages 2) additional damages if the insurance company or it’s agent acted knowingly 3) court costs 4) attorney’s fees The most common actual damages are the policy benefits themselves. There can be actual damages beyond the policy benefits and depending on the circumstances, this can take many forms. One example would be in a “credit disability” policy. This would be where a person has credit disability insurance – the insurance company denies the claim – and as a result the insured misses payments and has their credit damaged. In this scenario the insured would have a claim for the damages resulting from damaged credit.

Potential Recovery In Insurance Cases

July 30, 2013 | Mark S. Humphreys

Weatherford insurance attorneys need to be able to discuss with clients what the value of their claim might be. Here is some food for consideration.

Texas Insurance Code, Section 541.152 tells us a person who prevails in a lawsuit may obtain the following:

– the damages actually suffered;

What Can Happen When Insurance Company Refuses To Pay

July 13, 2013 | Mark S. Humphreys

Fort Worth Insurance lawyers will like telling clients about a case that went to trial in Jefferson County, Texas, in May 2013.

This blog tells one story after another about situations involving insurance and claims. The Southeast Texas Record, a Legal Journal ran a story titled, “Hurrican Ike Trial: Jurors Hit National Lloyds With $915K Verdict.” Here is what the article tells us:

A Jefferson County jury recently found National Lloyds Insurance committed deceptive trade practices in the handling of a policy claim following Hurricane Ike, awarding the plaintiff nearly a million dollars in damages.

Market Value In Insurance Cases

December 18, 2012 | Mark S. Humphreys

Fort Worth insurance lawyers need to read this case. The style of the case is, Texas Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company v. Joseph Wilde. The opinion was issued by the El Paso Court of Appeals.

Texas Farm appeals from a judgment awarding Wilde damages, lost profits, and attorney’s fees resulting from a jury verdict that Texas Farm committed unfair or deceptive settlement practices under Texas Insurance Code Section 541.060. This court reversed a judgment in favor or Wilde and rendered a take-nothing judgment.

Wilde had a policy of insurance with Texas Farm which insured Wilde’s 1999 John Deere 7455 cotton stripper for a maximum value of $90,000. Wilde filed a claim on the policy after the cotton stripper caught fire on December 16, 2005, and was “completely destroyed.” After Texas Farm denied Wilde’s claim, Wilde filed suit for breach of contract, breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing, and unfair settlement practices, and sought to recover damages for the market value of the cotton stripper, lost profits, attorney’s fees, and treble damages.

Damages Determination

September 4, 2012 | Mark S. Humphreys

Grand Prairie lawyers and those in Dallas, Richardson, Mesquite, Garland, Irving, Carrollton, Farmers Branch, and other areas of Dallas County need to be able to evaluate the value of a claim when discussing the claim with a client. There is no certain way to guarantee an end result in insurance litigation but there are things to be knowledgeable about in order to give informed advice.

The United States District Court, Eastern District, Sherman Division issued an opinion in July 2012, that deals with claim value determination. This case centers around the appraisal process and determination and it’s effect on a case. The style of the case is, Amtrust Insurance Co. of Kansas, Inc. v. Starship League City, L.P. and USA Self Storage, Inc.

Procedurally, this case was heard by a United States Magistrate Judge. The Magistrate ruled in favor of Amtrust in an action seeking declaratory relief.