Dallas Fort Worth Insurance Lawyer Blog

Policy Interpretation

September 11, 2011 | Mark S. Humphreys

Grand Prairie, Weatherford, Fort Worth, Dallas, Arlington, and other business people in Texas need to understand what the insurance policy they have purchased covers, and what it does not cover.

The United States District Court, Northern District, Dallas Division, issued an opinion on July 27, 2011, in the case styled, Great American Insurance Company v. AFS/IBEX Financial Services, Inc., that would be interesting for these business people. The Judge in this case is Reed O’Conner. Here is some background.

This case arises out of a dispute over insurance coverage. AFS entered into an agreement with McMahon Sr., the owner of Charles McMahon Insurance Agency, authorizing McMahon Sr. to originate, create, and sign premium fiance agreements on behalf of insureds. AFS sought insurance coverage from Great American Insurance Company (GAIC) to protect it from crime risks. GAIC sold AFS two applicable policies.

When Does The Policy Go Into Effect?

September 10, 2011 | Mark S. Humphreys

The above is a reasonable question for someone in Grand Prairie, Weatherford, Arlington, Fort Worth, Dallas, or anywhere else in Texas to ask. When does a policy go into effect? Sometimes a claim arises immediately.

The Corpus Christi Court of Appeals had this issue come up in the case styled, Mark A. Becerra v. Maria Elena Ball A/K/A Nena Ball D/B/A Ball Insurance Agency, National Lloyds Insurance Company, and Ruth Cantu. This opinion was issued in August 2011.

This appeal involves National Lloyds denial of Becerra’s insurance claim. Becerra asserted that Rudy Cantu , an employee of Ball Insurance Agency was allegedly negligent in obtaining an insurance policy on Becerra’s behalf. The trial court granted summary judgment on National Lloyds behalf as it relates to the breach of contract claim and negligence claim. We will discuss the breach of contract claim only.

Arson Fires

September 8, 2011 | Mark S. Humphreys

Even in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Fort Worth, Dallas, Euless, Bedford, Hurst, Saginaw, Roanoke, Keller, Grapevine, and other locations in the Metroplex area, arson fires occur. One of the first things an insurance company is always going to do when there is a fire claim is investigate for the possibility of arson. If the insurance company determines a fire is arson, the next thing they will do is see if the insureds’ under the insurance policy are responsible or have a motive to set the fire. Of course by this time, the insured needs to be consulting with an experienced Insurance Law Attorney.

A 1987, case from the Dallas Court of Appeals styled, Texas General Indemnity Company v. Jerry L. Speakman and Donald E. Coffman, is interesting based on the facts in the case. There are a lot of legal procedures in the case, which will not be discussed because they are unusual and hard to follow without a lot of legal knowledge. But briefly on the legal aspects, the trial was to the Judge instead of a jury and the Judge ruled in favor of the insurance company. Coffman and Speakman filed a “motion to correct judgment or for new trial” and a “first amended motion to correct judgment or for a new trial.” Surprisingly the Judge reversed his earlier decision and ruled against the Texas General Indemnity Company. He awarded close to $200,000 to the insureds. This appeals court upheld the trial court decision with some modification to the money.

Here are some of the facts in this case.

Homeowners Policy And Examination Under Oath

September 6, 2011 | Mark S. Humphreys

People in Grand Prairie, Dallas, Fort Worth, Arlington, Richardson, Garland, Duncanville, De Soto, Irving, Mesquite, and other places in Texas, who have a homeowners insurance policy, probably know they are suppose to pay their premiums. Beyond paying those premiums, most people do not understand what other obligations they have as part of the policy.

One of the obligations most insureds have under a homeowners policy is to submit to an examination under oath (EUO) if requested by the insurance company. A 2005, case out of the Beaumont Court of Appeals discusses this obligation. The style of the case is, In re Foremost County Mutual Insurance Company and Jim Doland. Here is some information on the case.

It is a mandamus proceeding arising out of Foremost’s denial of a fire loss claim. The claim was denied after the insured, Kenneth Whitney, refused to submit to an EUO. Foremost sought an abatement of the lawsuit filed by Whitney until he had complied with the policy requirement of submitting to an EUO. The trial court refused Foremost’s request and the mandamus proceeding resulted.

Requirement Of An Examination Under Oath (EUO)

September 4, 2011 | Mark S. Humphreys

Someone in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Hurst, Euless, Bedford, Grapevine, Keller, Saginaw, Roanoke, Fort Worth, or anywhere else in Tarrant County might ask, “Why do I have to submit to an examination under oath?” Here is a case that might shed some light to that question.

The case is styled, Shannon Trahan and Joleen Trahan Woods v. Fire Insurance Exchange and Texas Farmers Insurance. The opinion in this case was issued in 2005, by the Beaumont Court of Appeals. This case is an appeal from a summary judgment rendered in favor of Fire Insurance Exchange (FIE) and Texas Farmers Insurance (TFI). This court upheld the summary judgment.

As some background, on December 31, 2000, the Trahan’s home and automobile were destroyed in a fire. The Trahans filed a fire loss claim. On February 8, 2001, they signed a Proof of Loss form. On February 14, 2001, FIE requested the Trahans submit to examinations under oath (EUOs). Finally, on August 29, 2001, the Trahans submitted to the EUOs, and they were signed and sworn to on September 20, 2001. On October 8, 2001, FIE accepted the Trahans fire loss claim and issued checks.

Rental House Fire

September 3, 2011 | Mark S. Humphreys

Lots of people in Weatherford, Mineral Wells, Aledo, Springtown, Millsap, Brock, Hudson Oaks, Willow Park, Cool, Peaster, Poolville, and other towns in Parker County own rental property. There will be times when that property is vacant. What if a fire occurs when the property is vacant?

The Fort Worth Court of Appeals issued an opinion in 2002, that dealt with the above scenario. The style of the case is, Charles J. Walch v. United Services Automobile Association Property and Casualty Insurance Co. The trial court had granted a summary judgement in favor of United and Walch appealed. There were several issues in this case but the relevant part to this writing, is where the appeals court overruled the trial court as it relates to the question as to whether the property was “vacant” at the time the fire loss occurred.

Here are relevant facts to know. Walch owed a small rental house that was insured by United under a policy of insurance. The tenants of the house moved out on May 15, 1999, and left it in a damaged condition. About ten days later, Walch began renovations. On September 2, 1999, Walch discovered the house had been damaged by fire and in October filed a claim for the fire losses.

What Happens If My Spouse Sets The House On Fire?

September 1, 2011 | Mark S. Humphreys

It will happen to someone in Grand Prairie, Weatherford, Fort Worth, Arlington, Lake Worth, Benbrook, Crowley, North Richland Hills, or somewhere else in Tarrant County or a surrounding area. A spouse will be upset or depressed or temporarily out of control and while in one of these mindsets, burn the house down on purpose.

The San Antonio Court of Appeals issued an opinion in 1996, in a case where it appears a spouse burned down the house. Of course the insurance company denied the claim based on the policy defense of arson. The style of the case is, Jan Saunders v. Commonwealth Lloyd’s Insurance Company.

This was an appeal from a summary judgment in an insurance bad faith case. Here is some background.

House Fires And Insurance And Arson

August 30, 2011 | Mark S. Humphreys

A house fire in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Garland, Mesquite, Richardson, Carrollton, Farmers Branch, Irving, or anywhere else in the North Texas area is a real nightmare for those involved. It is even worse when the insurance company accuses you of arson and denies the claim.

There are many things an experienced Insurance Law Attorney can do to help someone who is accused by the insurance company of having committed arson own their own house in order to recover the insurance proceeds.

One first needs to understand that arson is a criminal offense. The crime of arson is defined in the Texas Penal Code, Section 28.02. According to this section of the Penal Code:

Suspicion Of Arson

August 28, 2011 | Mark S. Humphreys

Arson happens in places like Fort Worth, Dallas, Garland, Irving, Mesquite, Richardson, Plano, Duncanville, De Soto, and all other places in Texas at one time or another. But to be accused of arson and have your insurance claim denied because you are suspected by the insurance company is something else. Is there a typical case or situation where this comes about? The answer is no. Every situation has to be scrutinized based on the facts of that particular situation.

The Texarkana Court of Appeals issued an opinion in a 1990 case that discusses the way these arson cases are evaluated. The style of the case is, The St. Paul Guardian Insurance Company v. Teri Lynn Luker and Paul Kimbel Luker. In the case, a jury found in favor of the Lukers and compensated the Lukers for contractual damages of $27,000 and tort damages of $50,000 and mental anguish of $15,000. The court reversed all but the contractual damages of $27,000.

Here are some of the facts of this case.

When Can An Insurance Company Declare A Policy Void?

August 27, 2011 | Mark S. Humphreys

If you live in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Fort Worth, Saginaw, Haslet, Newark, Rhome, Benbrook, Lake Worth, Crowley, Mansfield, or anywhere else in North Texas, there is a chance you have a life insurance policy. Naturally you would expect that the policy would pay the intended beneficary. Well, that is not always the case, particularly if the insurance company can show misrepresentations in the policy application. Whenever they try to do this, it is vital that an experienced Insurance Law Attorney be contacted.

The Texas Supreme Court took on this issue in a case decided in 1980, styled, Mattie Emmaline Mayes v. Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company. Here are some of the facts in the case.

On May 6, 1976, Albert Mayes signed and delivered to an agent, Part 1 of two applications for life insurance. Mays had not disclosed to Mutual Life that certain answers in his application which were correct when made had become false by the time the policies were delivered. The two policies were identical except for the amount of coverage.