Dallas Fort Worth Insurance Lawyer Blog

Bad Faith Insurance Lawyers – Recovering Extra

March 27, 2023 | Mark S. Humphreys

Bad Faith Insurance Attorneys need to read this 1988, opinion from the Texas Supreme Court. The opinion is styled, Vail v. Texas Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co.

This case involves a house burning down. A claim was made for the homeowner insurance benefits and the insurance company denied the claim. Here is how the court ruled on the recovery of money beyond the policy benefits:

The court of appeals did not make specific holdings on the Vails’ other points of error but generally agreed with the contentions of Texas Farm. Because we reversed the court of appeals and hold that the Vails stated a cause of action for unfair claims settlement practices and are entitled to treble damages under the DTPA, we will also address the parties’ points of error on which the court of appeals did not specifically rule.

Bad Faith Life Insurance Denial

March 25, 2023 | Mark S. Humphreys

Imagine this. A life insurance claim is denied. The beneficiary goes to an attorney who makes sends a demand letter to the life insurance company demanding payment and monies for their bad faith actions. In response to the demand letter the life insurance company sends the policy proceeds, plus interest. Does that end the matter?

This was answered as far back in Texas as 1908, in the Texas Supreme Court opinion styled, Penn Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Manor.

For the full facts the opinion, which is kinda long, needs to be read.

Life Insurance Claim Denial Attorney – Pecuniary Interest – No Blood Relationship

March 20, 2023 | Mark S. Humphreys

Can someone who is not related by blood have a pecuniary interest in the life of another as it relates to life insurance policy? This answer is discussed in a 1942, Texas Supreme Court opinion styled, Drane v. Jefferson Standard Life Ins. Co.

Here is what the court discussed in that case.

Although not related by blood or marriage to Harry Ezell, Jr. not indebted to him in any way, his godmother Dorothy Drane named him as beneficiary in two life insurance policies. Upon her death, the executor of her estate, her brother, asserted that Ezell had n insurable interest. The facts showed Miss Drane had bought clothes for the boy for fifteen years, had paid for his medical care, had cared for him while his mother was ill, had taken him on vacation, and sadly was killed in a wreck as she drove to visit him his freshman year in college, “taking him a radio, a cop and an apple pie.” The court concluded that Ezell did have an insurable interest based on a reasonable expectation of pecuniary benefit and advantage from Miss Drane’s continued life . “We think that when Dorothy Drane was killed ‘his temporal affairs, his just hopes and well grounded expectations of support, of patronage, and advantage in life’ were impaired …. It is inconceivable, under the facts of this record, that he would ever have been tempted to destroy her life in order to collect the proceeds of the two policies in suit.

Life Insurance Claims Denial Attorney – Insurable Interest

March 18, 2023 | Mark S. Humphreys

Who are those who have an insurable interest in the life of a person? The answer is usually obvious, but not always.

Here’s an answer.

Those who have an insurable interest in the life of another fall into three general classes:

Hail Storm Damage And Experts

March 13, 2023 | Mark S. Humphreys

Hail claims are a frequent source of litigation. Sometimes and expert is needed in these cases. The issue of using an expert in a hail damage case arose in this 2023 opinion from the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The opinion is styled, Mohamed Bakri v. Nautilus Insurance Company.

This case arises out of Plaintiff Mohamed Bakri’s insurance claims for wind and hail damage. Bakri alleges that a winter storm during the Policy Period caused significant damage to his properties. After an investigation, Nautilus refused to cover the damage, claiming that it was merely cosmetic. In addition, Nautilus determined that any impairment beyond cosmetic damage occurred before the Policy Period.

Bakri sued Nautilus claiming violation of the Texas Insurance Code and breach of contract. Bakri had an expert to help prove his damages. Nautilus filed a motion to exclude the testimony of Bakri’s expert, Johnson, and moved for summary judgment.

Claims for Late Payments – Insurance

March 11, 2023 | Mark S. Humphreys

Insurance claims for late payment are a frequent issue when someone sees an insurance lawyer about the way they have been treated in an insurance claim. This late payment issue is addressed in a 2023 opinion from the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The opinion is styled, Craig Collins v. State Farm Lloyds.

In this case the insured suffered damages from a tornado. A claim was made immediately and State Farm sent out an adjuster. The initial found some damages and paid the damages. Collins asserted there were more damages and another adjuster investigated the claim and found more damages and paid those damages. Collins asserted there were still more damages and a third adjuster came out and additional damage was found and the damages were paid.

Collins sued for various causes of action including violations of the “duty of good faith and fair dealing,” Texas Insurance Code damages under Section 541, and finally for damages under Section 542. A reading of the case shows a discussion of the first two and here is the discussion under the Section 542, Prompt Payment of Claims.

Insurance Cases And Attorney Fees

March 6, 2023 | Mark S. Humphreys

What is the value of my/an insurance claim?

That questions is often asked and the answer will vary depending on many factors. However, one of the factors that is important and asked by people seeking legal advice is, “Can I get back my legal fees?”

This issue is discussed in a 2023 opinion from the Western District of Texas, Austin Division. The opinion is styled, Jyoti Singh v. Riversource Life Insurance Company. Only the part of this case discussing the standards for recovering legal fees will be discussed here.

Experts And Insurance

March 4, 2023 | Mark S. Humphreys

Claims denial attorneys will on occasion find themselves in a position of needing to hire an expert to help with their case. The case referenced in the Blog is a hail damage case but the discussion is a discussion on what courts look at when determining whether an experts testimony will be allowed. The case is from Eastern District of Texas. The style of the case is, Hilltop Church of The Nazarene v. Church Mutual Insurance Co.

This case has other issues it discusses but here is what it says about experts.

Plaintiff claims that a March 2019 hailstorm caused damage to its property.

Improperly Suing The Adjuster

February 27, 2023 | Mark S. Humphreys

Here is a 2023 opinion that finds the suing of the insurance adjuster was improper. The opinion is styled, Hang Nguyen, et al v. AmGuard Insurance Company, et al. The opinion is from the Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division.

Plaintiffs own a homeowners insurance policy with AmGuard. After a hail and windstorm that caused damage to their property, the Plaintiffs submitted a claim under the policy for repairs. The adjuster assigned to the case is Shawn Mitchell. Coverage was eventually denied.

The Plaintiffs eventually sued AmGuard for breach of contract and both faith causes of action and various violations of the Texas Insurance Code. They sued Mitchell for civil conspiracy and various violations of the Insurance Code. After the action was filed, AmGuard filed an Election of Legal Responsibility, accepting any liability on behalf of Mitchell.

Pre-Suit Notice Of Damages

February 25, 2023 | Mark S. Humphreys

Bad Faith insurance lawyers understand that when sending an insurance company a pre-suit demand for damages that sending an improper letter ends up like sending no letter at all under certain circumstances. One of the issues related to pre-suit notice letters was the topic in a January 2023 opinion from the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The opinion is styled, J. David Koncak v. American Security Insurance Company.

Koncak suffered a hail damage claim in June 2019 and then again in October 2019. The claims resulted in a dispute and Koncak hired an attorney. The attorney sent a pre-suit demand letter as required by the Texas Insurance Code, Section 542A.003(b). The letter demanded damages in the amount of $550,000 plus $5,000 in attorney fees.

Koncak eventually filed suit. American Security filed motions contending the notice letter did not satisfy the requirements of 542A.003(b).