Here is an opinion from the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, that discusses the pleadings in a lawsuit where in the property owner claims to have suffered hail damage and the insurer denied the claim. The opinion is styled, Valtex Properties LLC v. Central Mutual Insurance Company.
The insured, ValTex, sued Central for various violations of the Texas Insurance Code. The allegations are that Central violated sections, 541.060(a)(1), 541.051, 541.052, and 541.061. In response, Central filed a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. This blog will deal with only Section 541.060(a)(1). However, the case is a good read on how the Court dealt with remaining Insurance Code sections.
To survive a motion to dismiss, a plaintiff must plead enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face. Thread bare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice. A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged. The plausibility standard is not akin to a ‘probability requirement,’ but it asks for more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully. When well-pleaded facts fail to achieve this plausibility standard, the complaint has alleged—but it has not shown—that the pleader is entitled to relief.