Dallas Fort Worth Insurance Lawyer Blog

Dallas life insurance lawyers have another old case to be aware of. This is a 1953, Texas Supreme Court case styled, Creighton et al. v. Barnes. Here is some relevant information to know on this case:

Petitioners in this case, the mother, daughter and a sister of B. B. Barnes, as the named beneficiaries of the two Jefferson Standard Life Insurance Company policies, filed this suit against the Insurance Company for the proceeds of the two policies. The Insurance Company answered with an interpleader suit, wherein it impleaded respondent, the third wife and surviving widow of B. B. Barnes, and said that all of the petitioners and the respondent were claiming the right to the proceeds of both policies, and tendered the money into court, and asked the court to decide which of the claimants were entitled to receive the funds and asked that it be discharged with its costs and attorneys’ fees. Respondent answered claiming the proceeds by virtue of the will of B. B. Barnes. All parties arrived at a stipulation as to the facts in the case, and each party filed a motion for summary judgment. The trial court had a hearing, and sustained petitioners’ motion and denied respondent’s motion and granted judgment for petitioners for a certain part of the proceeds and for respondent for the balance. On final appeal, this Court sustained the trial court.

It was stipulated that the petitioners are the ones named as beneficiaries in the two policies, and entitled to recover the proceeds thereof unless B. B. Barnes changed the payment of these proceeds in favor of his wife by the provisions of his last will and testament.

Dallas life insurance attorneys need to know this 1967, case from the Texas Supreme Court. The style is McFarland v. Franklin Life Ins. Co. Here is the relevant info.

This appeal involves an asserted right to recover a twelve per cent penalty and attorney’s fees under the Texas Prompt Payment of Claims Act. The principal question to be decided is whether Franklin Life Insurance, respondent, had reasonable grounds for anticipating rival claims. This Court said no.

In 1950 respondent issued a policy of insurance on the life of John V. McFarland, who was about nine years of age at the time. The policy was taken out by his parents, Bernard and Gwendolyn McFarland, the latter of whom is petitioner here. Bernard was named in the policy as primary beneficiary, and petitioner was designated as contingent beneficiary. John married in 1962 and died the following year. His father predeceased him; he was survived by his widow and petitioner. Petitioner brought this suit against respondent to recover the amount due on the policy plus the statutory penalty and attorney’s fees. Respondent interpleaded Mrs. John V. McFarland, admitted liability for the proceeds of the policy, and paid the funds into court. The trial court, sitting without a jury, awarded petitioner the money so deposited but allowed no penalty or attorney’s fee. The only question brought forward on appeal was whether petitioner is entitled to recover such penalty, attorney’s fee and court costs.

Grand Prairie insurance attorneys need to know what is prohibited to be put in a life insurance policy by an insurance company.

The Texas Insurance Code has sections that say what some of these prohibitions are.

Some of the more important sections are Texas Insurance Code, Sections 705.001 through 705.004. 705.003 tells us that an insurance policy provision that states that a misrepresentation, including a false statement, made in a proof of loss or death makes the policy void or voidable, has no effect, and is not a defense in a lawsuit brought on the policy unless the insurance company can prove the following:

Fort Worth life insurance attorneys need to know the areas of dispute concerning life insurance policies.

Life insurance coverage is pretty plain to understand. If the person whose life is covered under a life insurance policy dies, then the insurance company is to pay benefits to the named insured. Here are a list of reasons why a dispute may arise concerning the payment of benefits under a life insurance policy:

1) An insurance agent may misrepresent the benefits of his insurance company policy to induce the insured person to switch from another company to the one he represents and can make a commission from;

Fort Worth life insurance attorneys should know this – but here goes with a reminder.

The most common life insurance types are term, whole life, and universal life.

“Term” life insurance policies simply provide a death benefit in return for a premium payment. At the end of the policy year, or “term,” the insurance ends, and the policy has no value. Most of these are for 10 or 20 years. Because the insured person is only paying for the death benefit, term policies are cheaper in the early years. As the insured person gets older, the risk of death increases and so does the premium, so term policies may become more expensive that the other types of life insurance. Insurance companies typically sell term policies that promise a fixed premium for a set number of years as stated above. This means an insurance company that sells a term policy for a fixed period, such as 10 years, will not be allowed to increase the premiums during that 10 year period.