Dallas Fort Worth Insurance Lawyer Blog

Life Insurance – ERISA

January 9, 2019 | Mark S. Humphreys

Here is a life insurance case that involves a plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). It is a 2018, 5th Circuit Court of Appeals case styled, Jason Crawford v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company.

This is a summary judgment case granted in favor of MetLife. This Court sustained the ruling in favor of MetLife.

The deceased, Tracy Crawford, worked as a flight attendant for Southwest Airlines. Tracy enrolled in the company offered life insurance benefit plan in 2008, and submitted a paper document naming her great-nephew as the primary beneficiary.

Storm Damage And New Law

January 6, 2019 | Mark S. Humphreys

A new law, Texas Insurance Code, Section 542A.006(a) matters in this case.

The case is from the Western District of Texas, Austin Division. It is styled, Yan Qing Jiang v. The Travelers Home and Marine Insurance Company and Dana Ellen Pustka.

Jiang filed this action in state district court alleging her home was damaged in a storm and that Travelers is the insurer and the adjuster was Pustka. Jiang asserted causes of action for violations of the Texas Insurance Code and the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA). Travelers and Pustka had the case removed to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C., Section 1332(a), and argue that Pustka was improperly joined in an effort to defeat diversity jurisdiction.

Insurance Policy Anti-Assignment Clauses

January 5, 2019 | Mark S. Humphreys

Most people do not know what an anti-assignment clause in an insurance policy means. This issue is discussed in a 2018, opinion from the 14th Court of Appeals. The opinion is styled, Safeco Insurance Company of America v. Clear Vision Windshield Repair, LLC.

This case concerns anti-assignment clauses in insurance policies. Clear Vision repaired chips in the windshields of Safeco’s insureds. Safeco recently refused to pay invoices for the windshield repairs on four of Safeco’s insureds. The insureds had assigned the claim to Clear Vision for payment and Safeco denied the payments relying on the anti-assignment clause in the policies at issue.

The trial court ruled in favor of Clear Vision and that ruing was upheld on appeal by this Court.

Life Insurance – Interpleader

January 2, 2019 | Mark S. Humphreys

Life Insurance cases can have a surprising number of twists to them. Readers of the DallasFortWorthInsuranceBlog have seen some of these various twists.

The U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division, issued an opinion in a case styled, Reliastar Life Insurance v. Trina R. Wiemer, Laura R. Weimer, and Roderich W. Weimer, Jr., which is interesting.

This case is an interpleader action. Reliastar issued a life insurance policy on the life of Vincent H. Weimer, who died on August 19, 2017. The policy was for $3,000,000.00 and this amount is claimed by competing persons. Because of these competing persons, Reliastar filed this interpleader action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 22 and 28 U.S.C. Section 1335.

Homeowners Claim And Policy Language

December 30, 2018 | Mark S. Humphreys

The U.S. District Court, Western District, Austin Division, issued an opinion on November 16, 2018, that is worth reading. It is styled, Thomas G. Kezar and Sylva Shroyer Kezar v. State Farm Lloyds.

This is an appeal from a partial motion for summary judgement as to one issue in the case. The issue is whether Kezars still had a claim against State Farm for breach of contract and extra-contractual damages under the dwelling coverage aspect of the claim when State Farm had already properly and timely paid that aspect of the claim after an appraisal award. This Court ruled in favor of State Farm.

The policy language at issue states:

Proving Uninsured / Underinsured Coverage

December 29, 2018 | Mark S. Humphreys

The Fort Worth Court of Appeals issued an opinion on November 15, 2018, that is worthy reading for lawyers handling uninsured / underinsured motorist coverage (UIM). The case is styled, William Blevins v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company.

This case is an appeal from a trial by Blevins against State Farm wherein the jury ruled in favor of State Farm. The opinion is lengthy and the majority of it deals with whether the decision by the jury was justified in light of the evidence. What is dealt with here is the ruling by the court to not allow in evidence regarding the UIM coverage.

Blevins argued the trial Judge erred by declining to allow testimony about Blevin’s UIM coverage.

Commercial Policy Case

December 27, 2018 | Mark S. Humphreys

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion on November 14, 2018, in a situation which is going to be rarely seen, but is something for insurance lawyers to know exists. The case is styled, Sentry Select Insurance Company v. Lorena Munoz, Individually and on behalf of the Estate of Lorenzo Munoz, and as Next Friend of L.M. and C.M., Minor Children; Virginia Munoz.

The Munoz’s were defendants in the case. Sentry had been granted a summary judgment in the District Court.

On August 17, 2010, Lorenzo Munoz, was killed when the semi-truck in which he was traveling veered off the highway and crashed into a concrete drainage channel. The semi-truck consisted of a tractor owned by Moore Freight Services and a trailer leased by Goal Transport. Sentry issued a commercial auto insurance policy to Goal.

Life Insurance Assignments

December 25, 2018 | Mark S. Humphreys

This 2018, Fort Worth Court of Appeals opinion is unique and involves a situation most life insurance lawyers will not ever see, however, it is worth knowing about due to some of the ruling by the appeals court. The case is styled, Old American Insurance Company v. Lincoln Factoring, LLC.

Lincoln is an assignee of a portion of benefits under a life insurance policy. Lincoln was assigned a portion of the benefits by the life insurance beneficiary for advancing costs of the burial of the insured. The insured had a life insurance policy with Old American.

When the insured died, the beneficiary made a claim for benefits. Instead of paying the benefits, Old American insisted they needed a copy of the death certificate. When a copy of the death certificate was provided, Old American withheld payment because the death certificate stated that the manner of death of the insured was pending investigation.

The Heart Of Bad Faith Insurance

December 23, 2018 | Mark S. Humphreys

Any Insurance Law Attorney knows the heart of the law regarding bad faith insurance is found in the Texas Insurance Code. Other sources include the Texas Department of Insurance and the Texas Administrative Code, among other sources.

The Texas Insurance Code, Chapter 541, defines and prohibits unfair and deceptive insurance practices.

The statutes allow a private cause of action by any person who has sustained actual damages caused by another’s engaging in any act or practice that is defined as an unfair method of competition or unfair or deceptive act or practice in the business of insurance, or defined as an unlawful deceptive trade practice. This is found in Section 541.151. The definitions of unfair and deceptive practices are found in two places: (1) Texas Insurance Code, Sections 541.051 to 541.061; and (2) Section 17.46(b) of the Business & Commerce Code, the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices — Consumer Protection Act (DTPA).

Alleging Facts Sufficiently Against An Adjuster

December 22, 2018 | Mark S. Humphreys

As has been discussed before, insurance companies would rather litigate cases in Federal Court instead of State Court. The reasons are numerous.

One way to stay out of Federal Court is to defeat diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Section 1332(a). This is most commonly done by suing a local adjuster for the wrongs the adjuster has committed when the insurance company is an insurance company that maintains its main head-quarters out of state.

The Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, issued an opinion on October 30, 2018, wherein the Court sue sponte remanded a case back to the State Court after the insurer had removed it to Federal Court. The case is styled, Joan Elaine Murray v. Allstate Vehicle and Property Insurance Company and Brandon Joseph Chisolm.