Dallas Fort Worth Insurance Lawyer Blog

Life Insurance Denial

June 7, 2012 | Mark S. Humphreys

Insurance lawyers in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Fort Worth, Haslet, Roanoke, Newark, Saginaw, and other places in Tarrant County would want to be aware of this case.

The case opinion was issued in 1980, by the Texas Supreme Court. The style of the case is, Mattie Emmaline Mayes v. Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company. It is one of those cases that Insurance Law Attorneys need to be aware of.

Rather than being decided on a motion for summary judgment, the way many insurance cases are decided, this case went to trial and there was a finding for Mayes. The intermediate appeals court reversed the trial court and then the Texas Supreme Court reversed the intermediate court and sent the case back to the trial court for further findings.

Misrepresentation In Purchase Of Insurance Policy

June 5, 2012 | Mark S. Humphreys

Weatherford attorneys and those in Mineral Wells, Aledo, Azle, Springtown, Peaster, Millsap, Brock, Hudson Oaks, Willow Park, and other places in Parker County would want to read the case decided in July 2011, by the San Antonio Court of Appeals. The case is styled, Texas Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. v. Shannan Rogers and Cristen Bazan et al. Here is some background.

In 2008, Cynthia Bazan purchased a house in Kerr County with a mortgage from Regency Solutions, which required her to obtain insurance on the house. Bazan purchased a policy from Farm Bureau. On January 14, 2009, a fire completely destroyed her house and all of its contents. She made a claim and Farm Bureau began a criminal background check of Bazan and the cause of the fire. The fire was determined to be of “undetermined” origin. Bazan, in her interview admitted to a criminal history. However, she had denied the criminal history in her application for insurance. In fact, she had a lengthy criminal history. Farm Bureau made a decision to rescind the policy, thus denying Bazan policy benefits for the fire loss.

The specific policy language relied on by Farm Bureau read:

Dog Bite Claims / Cases

June 3, 2012 | Mark S. Humphreys

Weatherford lawyers, and those in Mineral Wells, Springtown, Aledo, Azle, Peaster, Hudson Oaks, Willow Park, Millsap, Brock, and other parts of Parker County might be surprised to learn this about dog bite claims. How many there are and how much they cost insurance companies in claims.

An article posted on Yahoo News on May 17th might be a little surprising.

The article tells us that most stories about a dog biting someone does not get a lot of attention in the news, but it costs insurance companies hundreds of millions in claims every year.

Appraisals

June 2, 2012 | Mark S. Humphreys

Insurance attorneys in Grand Prairie, Fort Worth, Dallas, and other areas in Texas will have clients who need advice regarding the appraisal process when homeowners make insurance claims.

Generally speaking, an appraisal is appropriate in cases where the insurance company acknowledges that a loss has occurred, but there is a dispute as to the value or extent of the loss. The easiest example to understand is a situation where someone has a valuable antique stolen. The insured makes a claim and the insurance company investigates, the thief is caught, but he has destroyed the antique. So, there is no suspicion regarding the insured and the insured claims the antique is worth $10,000. But, the insurance company says it is only worth $4,000.

To settle the dispute, either side, the insurance company or the insured, can invoke the appraisal clause in the insurance contract.

Insurance Company Playing Games – Get An Insurance Attorney

May 31, 2012 | Mark S. Humphreys

Insurance Attorneys in Weatherford, Mineral Wells, Aledo, Springtown, Azle, Brock, Millsap, Willow Park, Hudson Oaks, and other places in Parker County need to understand the games insurance companies play on their insureds.

Any attorney who has been practicing for very long has heard stories that are disgusting. Insurance companies consider insurance a bet, and guess what, … it is. The insurance company is betting you will not have a loss they have to pay for. You are betting that you might have a loss and want protection in case it happens. When an insured makes a claim, the insurance company is losing its bet. Insurance companies do not like losing their bets. As a result, they will find any way they can to keep from paying the claim or to reduce the amount of money they have to pay on the claim.

The consumer protection group, Texas Watch, published an article recently titled, “Insurance Myth #2: Insurance Companies Always Pay Claims Fully And Promptly.” Well, not exactly!

Insurance Lawyers And Insureds Need To Know The Myths

May 29, 2012 | Mark S. Humphreys

An Insurance Attorney in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Fort Worth, Hurst, Euless, Bedford, or anywhere else in Tarrant County need to know the myths about insurance coverage in their policies.

Most people who buy an insurance policy think they are covered. If they buy a homeowners policy, they assume that if anything gets damaged or destroyed in their home is covered by the policy. Well, that is just not reality.

The consumer protection group, Texas Watch, ran an article recently that points out the myths related to insurance. Part of that article is titled, “Insurance Myth #1: “You’re Covered.”

Automobile Policy Exclusions

May 27, 2012 | Mark S. Humphreys

Weatherford Insurance Lawyers and those in Mineral Wells, Aledo, Azle, Springtown, Willow Park, Hudson Oaks, Millsap, Brock, and other places in Parker County need to be aware of this case.

It is a 1971, opinion issued by the Houston Court of Appeals. The style of the case is, Carl Calvin Futrell v. Indiana Lumbermens Mutual Insurance Company.

This is a suit for medical payment benefits under an automobile insurance policy. Futrell sued Lumbermens for medical expenses incurred by his minor son, who was injured while riding a motorbike when it collided with a motorcycle. Futrell contended that the trial court erred in concluding that a motorcycle is not an automobile within the meaning of that term as it is used in the medical payments coverage of the Texas family combination automobile insurance policy.

Exclusions In Insurance Policies

May 26, 2012 | Mark S. Humphreys

Insurance Lawyers in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Fort Worth, Lake Worth, Saginaw, Benbrook, Burleson, and other places in Tarrant County would want to be aware of this older case.

The case was decided in 1967, by the Dallas Court of Appeals. The style of the case is, William A. Cockrum v. Travelers Indemnity Company.

This is an appeal by Cockrum from a take nothing summary judgment in favor of Travelers in a suit to recover medical payments under a family automobile insurance policy.

Interpreting Medical Payments Coverage

May 24, 2012 | Mark S. Humphreys

For attorneys in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Fort Worth, Hurst, Euless, Bedford, and other places in Tarrant County, interpreting insurance policies can be difficult. Even experienced Insurance Law Attorneys will often times disagree on what the wording in a policy means as it relates to the facts of a claim.

Here is a case wherein “medical payments coverage” is being interpreted in order to determine how it is paid under the given facts.

This case is a 1973, case out of the Waco Court of Appeals. The style of the case is, Haskell M Dhane et ux. v. Trinity Universal Insurance Co.

What Is An Occurrence In An Insurance Policy?

May 22, 2012 | Mark S. Humphreys

Weatherford attorneys, and those in Mineral Wells, Aledo, Azle, Springtown, Hudson Park, Willow Park, Millsap, Brock, Cool, and other places in Parker County should be interested in this case.

The style of the case is, Foust v. Ranger Insurance Company. The opinion was issued by the San Antonio Court of Appeals in 1998. Here are some facts:

In 1994, Foust farmed various tracts of land which abutted land owned and farmed by Walters Farms. In May 1994, Walters Farms retained Lindeman to crop dust the milo crop on its property. The herbicide used is dangerous to cotton. Some of the herbicide drifted from the target area on to various tracts of land being farmed by Foust for cotton, causing severe damage to Foust’s cotton crop. Foust sued Lindeman, Walter Farms, and the manufacturer of the herbicide for loss of income suffered as a result of the damaged cotton crop.