Fort Worth life insurance attorneys and those in Dallas and Weatherford need to know what the requirements are in a policy.

Texas Insurance Code, Section 1101.002(a), tells us life insurance policies must contain several prescribed provisions. These required provisions according to the Texas Insurance Code, generally include:

(a) Section 1101.003 says a life insurance policy must provide that the policy or the policy and the application for the policy constitute the entire contract between the parties;

Grand Prairie lawyers need to understand the legal purpose for insurance so that they can better advise clients about their cases.

The purpose for insurance is to compensate for a loss. It is not a way of gambling. The United States Supreme Court said in 1866, that an insurable interest is necessary for the following reasons:

To prevent gambling To reduce intentional loss To enforce the principle of equity Bringing this topic closer to the present a 1998, Tyler Court of Appeals case is worth knowing. It is styled, Stillwagoner v. Travelers Ins. Co.

Fort Worth life insurance lawyers may already know some of this – but just in case, here goes.

Life insurance pays a stated amount of benefits to the beneficiary upon the insured person’s death. The beneficiary is usually relatives but can be business partners and creditors. Usually, the policy has a “face amount value”. This would be the value paid by the insurance company upon the death of the insured. There are policies wherein the face amount is a starting point from which the amount stated is increased. An example would be a policy that pays a “double indemnity” for accidental deaths. This means that whatever the fact amount of the policy reads, such as $100,000, then that face amount doubles to $200,000 if death occurs as the result of an accident.

“Term” insurance policies pay a fixed amount stated in the policy if death occurs during the term of the policy. This is usually a stated time of 10 or 20 years.

Fort Worth insurance attorneys need to be able to advise a person whether or not they are entitled to recover under a policy of insurance. Just because a person has insurance does not mean they are automatically entitled to make a recovery on lost property. From a legal standpoint – a person must have an insurable interest.

A 1993, Dallas Court of Appeals case sheds some insight into how a person who has insurance on a piece of property, not be be able to recover for the loss of that property. The case is styled, Jones v. Texas Pacific Indemnity Company.

Here is some background:

Weatherford attorneys need to know the difference between “first party” insurance and “third party” insurance. So do attorneys in Willow Park, Aledo, Springtown, Milsap, Brock, Hudson Oaks, and all places in Parker County.

A “first party” insurance policy usually involves insurance that provides policy benefits directly to the insured or beneficiary. The Texas Insurance Code, Section 541.051(2) defines “first party claim” as a claim “by an insured or a policyholder under an insurance policy or contract or by a beneficiary named in the policy or contract that must be paid by the insurer directly to the insured or beneficiary.” These types of policies generally include health insurance, life insurance, disability insurance, homeowner’s property insurance, and commercial property insurance.

By contrast, “third party insurance” is usually liability insurance. This type of insurance is designed to insure against loss to third parties caused by the insured or another person covered by the policy. These types of policies include commercial general liability, homeowner’s liability, auto liability, and professional liability coverages.

Dallas insurance lawyers will run across situations where it is apparent an insurance agent does not have authority to do so of the things he is doing. So, what does this mean when trying to advise a client. Here is some information to know.

An insurance company cannot escape liability by showing that it did not authorize the specific wrongful act. This was stated by the Texas Supreme Court in cases in 1994 and 1979. One of those cases was Celtic Life Insurance Company v. Coats.

The Celtic court stated:

Fort Worth insurance lawyers and those in North Richland Hills, Saginaw, Roanoke, Lake Worth, and other places around Tarrant County need to understand the authority of insurance agents and the legal responsibilities related to that authority.

Courts have described actual authority this way:

“Actual” authority, which includes both express and implied authority, usually denotes that authority a principle: (a) intentionally confers upon an agent; (b) intentionally allows the agent to believe he possesses; or (c) allows the agent to believe that he possesses by want of due care. “Implied” actual authority exists only as an adjunct to express actual authority because implied authority is that which is proper, usual, and necessary to the exercise of the authority that the principle expressly delegates.

Dallas insurance attorneys need to know some basics about an examination under oath.

Almost all insurance policies require that the insured submit to an examination under oath upon request. The Corpus Christi Court of Appeals issued an opinion in 2011, related to this issue.

The style of the case is “In Re Cypress Texas Lloyds” and has the following relevant information:

Fort Worth insurance lawyers need to be able to answer the above question.

Texomashomepage.com published an article January 30, that would make you wonder about the answer. The title of the article is, “Woman Fights Back After Denied Coverage When Struck By Vehicle.”

The article tells us that if you own a vehicle, it’s the law to have insurance coverage.

Contact Information