Dallas Fort Worth Insurance Lawyer Blog

Permission To Use Vehicle And Texas Insurance Law

June 26, 2010 | Mark S. Humphreys

If you are a business owner in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Mansfield, Hurst, Euless, Bedford, Keller, Colleyville, Plano, Fort Worth, Burleson, or anywhere else in Texas and one of your employees is involved in an accident in a company vehicle, will your insurance provide coverage for him? This is the second of three posts on this related subject. Read on to find out what happened in one case.

The Texas Supreme Court, in 1979, issued an opinion in the case, Betty Coronado v. Employers’ National Insurance Company et al.

The issue before the court in this case was whether an employee who was driving a company owned vehicle on a purely personal mission after working hours was operating the vehicle with the permission of the company so as to be insured under the company’s automobile liability policy. The jury said yes. The first appeal court said no and the Texas Supreme Court agreed with the decision of no.

Permission To Use Car And Insurance Law

June 24, 2010 | Mark S. Humphreys

If you live in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Fort Worth, Mansfield, Duncanville, De Soto, Hurst, Euless, Bedford, Aledo, Azle, Weatherford, or anywhere else in Texas and a friend or acquaintance uses your car and has a wreck is there coverage? This posting and the two following will show what has happened in three previous cases.

In 1966, the Texas Supreme Court, in the case, Royal Endemnity Company v. H.E. Abbott & Sons, Inc., had this question before them in a case.

In this case, a 1961 pickup truck owned by Jack Herring and driven by George K. Landers ran into and damaged a building owned by H.E. Abbott & Sons, Inc. The truck was insured by a liability policy issued by Royal Indemnity Company. The insurance policy with Royal had a clause extending coverage to anyone operating the truck with Herring’s implied permission. In the lawsuit, Abbott obtained a judgment against Landers then sued Royal to enforce its judgment.

Compaints Against Insurance Companies In Texas

June 23, 2010 | Mark S. Humphreys

What can someone in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Mansfield, Bedford, Hurst, Euless, De Soto, Duncanville, Fort Worth, or anywhere else in Texas do when they are being “jerked around” by an insurance company? Answer number one – Find an experienced Insurance Law Attorney to consult with. Answer number two – file a complaint.

Seeking the aid of an experienced Insurance Law Attorney is sometimes hard to do. There are a lot of attorneys that help victims of accidents. These attorneys are usually referred to as Personal Injury Attorneys. These types of claims are called third party claims. The other type of claim is called a first party claim. This is a claim against your own insurance company. There are not that many attorneys that have experience in handling these types of claims. These attorneys are usually referred to as Insurance Law Attorneys.

The majority of the time an attorney is going to be able to get you the money you are entitled to plus more depending on how wrong the conduct of the insurance company has been in handling the claim. Consultations are usually free and there is nothing to lose by having an attorney look at your situation.

Insurance Company Denying Or Refusing Claim

June 22, 2010 | Mark S. Humphreys

It would be fair to say that most residents of Grand Prairie, Arlington, Mansfield, Coppell, De Soto, Duncanville, Fort Worth, Weatherford, and all other places in Texas, are responsible and conduct themselves in fair and proper ways in their dealings with others. Unfortunately that is not the way insurance companies always conduct their affairs.

The Dallas Morning News recently ran an article showing misconduct by two insurance companies doing business in Texas. The article is titled, “2 Texas auto insurers top complaints list, face investigation.” This article ran on June 5, 2010, and was authored by Terrence Stutz. Almost any experienced Insurance Law Attorney could tell you the names of the insurance companies that treat people right most of the time and the ones that treat people wrong most of the time. Further, even the “good” companies will do people wrong too many times.

In the article, Terrence Stutz gives some examples that are typical problems with the two companies named. The insurance companies are Loya Insurance and Old American County Mutual. These two companies were at the top of the list after an analysis of the Texas Department of Insurance figures showed that 10 of the 25 largest auto insurers in the state had worse than average customer service records. The above companies were at the top of the list.

No Coverage? Bad Faith?

June 20, 2010 | Mark S. Humphreys

What if you live in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Mansfield, Weatherford, Fort Worth, or anywhere else in Texas and you do not have the insurance coverage you think you have? Can the insurance company still be liable for bad faith?

Different courts have said that because the absence of coverage provides a reasonable basis to deny the claim, the general rule is that the absence of coverage also negates liability for breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing. This was stated by the Texas Supreme Court in 1995, in the case, Republic Insurance Company v. Stoker, and again in 1996, by the Texas Appeals Court in Houston [1st Dist.], in the case, North American Shipbuilding, Inc. v. Southern Marine & Aviation Underwriting, Inc.

But there are other important rulings where the courts have stated that the absence of coverage, does not necessarily excuse the insurance companies failure to investigate. This raises the possibility that an insurance company may be liable for breach of its duty of good faith and fair dealing, even though the claim is not covered. In the case, First Texas Savings Association v. Reliance Insurance Company, a 1992 case, decided by the Federal 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, the court remanded the case to the trial court to determine whether the duty had been breached, even though the court found no coverage. Later cases have continued to recognize the possibility of bad faith liability without coverage. One was another 5th Circuit case, Burditt v. West American Insurance Company, decided in 1996. Another was Jimenez v. State Farm Lloyds, a 1997 case decided by the Federal Court in the Western District of Texas.

Current Standard Of Good Faith And Fair Dealing In Texas

June 19, 2010 | Mark S. Humphreys

An earlier question on this blog was, How does someone in Grand Prairie, Dallas, Fort Worth, Arlington, Keller, Azle, Coppell, Sasche, Bedford, or anywhere else in Texas know if they are experiencing conduct of bad faith by their insurance company? Let’s look at the current standard for judging this issue.

In 1997, the Texas Supreme Court, issued an opinion in the case, The Universal Life Insurance Company, AIA Services Corporation, and AIA Insurance, Inc. v. Ida M. Giles. In this case the court adopted as the liability standard the statutory language in Article 21.21, Section 4(10) of the Texas Insurance Code. (The current version is Texas Insurance Code, Section 541.060(a)(2)(A)). Under that standard, an insurance company breaches its duty of good faith and fair dealing by “failing to attempt in good faith to effectuate a prompt, fair, and equitable settlement of a claim with respect to which the insurer’s liability has become reasonably clear.”

This statutory standard adopted in the Giles case takes the place of the common-law standard for unreasonable denying a claim or unreasonably delaying payment. The court’s analysis in the Giles case also supports adopting the statutory standard for failing to conduct a reasonable investigation. That standard is found in the Texas Insurance Code, Section 541.060(a)(7), which prohibits “refusing to pay a claim without conducting a reasonable investigation with respect to the claim.”

History Of Duty Of Good Faith And Fair Dealing In Texas

June 17, 2010 | Mark S. Humphreys

How does someone in Grand Prairie, Dallas, Fort Worth, Arlington, Mansfield, Keller, Azle, Coppell, Sasche, Bedford, or anywhere else in Texas know when the insurance company is acting in “bad faith”? The answer is not easy, but to understand, it helps to know the history a little.

When reviewing the theory of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, understanding the history aids in understanding its current form. But first, when in a situation where you suspect something “ain’t right”, you should consult an experienced Insurance Law Attorney. Even experienced attorneys will argue over this theory and how it applies to the facts of a particular situation.

The Texas Supreme Court, in 1983, in the case, English v. Fischer, is where the development of the common-law duty of good faith and fair dealing in Texas began. There, the plaintiff’s asked the court to recognize an implied covenant, or promise, of good faith and fair dealing that would require the insurance policy proceeds to be paid contrary to the terms of the contract. The court declined. But, the justices on the court pointed out that in other circumstances a duty of good faith and fair dealing arises from a special relationship between the parties. Insurance was one area where such a duty had been recognized.

False Representations By Insurance Companies And Agents

June 15, 2010 | Mark S. Humphreys

If you have an insurance agent in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Mansfield, De Soto, Aledo, Duncanville, Bedford, Fort Worth, Weatherford, or anywhere else in Texas, you might wonder if the guy was being completely honest with you when he sold you the insurance policy on your car or auto.

Lawyers.com defines false representation as an untrue or incorrect representation regarding a material fact that is made with knowledge or belief of its inaccuracy.

In the Texas Supreme Court case, DeSantis v. Wackenhut Corp., a 1990 case, the court said a false representation must involve an existing or past material fact, rather than a statement of opinion, judgment, probability, or expectation in order to constitute actionable fraud. Statements concerning future events, sales talk, “puffing,” and other similar statements are not considered actionable misrepresentations. This was stated by the Texas Court of Appeals in Tyler, in 1978, in the case, Hicks v. Wright. Similarly, representations concerning future events are not actionable unless at the time the statement or promise was made, the person making it did not intend to perform. This was stated by the Dallas Court of Appeals in 1976, in the case, Stone v. Enstam.

Fraud In Insurance Cases

June 13, 2010 | Mark S. Humphreys

How does a person in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Mansfield, Aledo, Burleson, Bedford, Euless, Lancaster, Hurst, Fort Worth, or any other city in Texas know when their insurance company or agent is committing fraud? The problem with fraud is that a person usually does not know when it happens.

USLegal defines fraud as an intentional misrepresentation of material existing fact made by one person to another with knowledge of its falsity and for the purpose of inducing the other person to act, and upon which the other person relies with resulting injury or damage. Fraud may also be made by an omission or purposeful failure to state material facts, which nondisclosure makes other statements misleading.

The Texas Supreme Court, in 1977, defined fraud in the case, Stone v. Lawyers Title Insurance Corp., saying:

Insurance Companies And Agents And Negligence

June 12, 2010 | Mark S. Humphreys

How does a person in Grand Prairie, Arlington, Mansfield, Hurst, Euless, Bedford, Fort Worth, Burleson, or anywhere else in Texas know when their insurance agent or insurance company has committed an act of negligence? This is a fair question and maybe this article will give you something to think about.

Insurance companies and insurance agents do not have a general duty to obtain coverage or to make sure the coverge they get for you is adequate. On the other hand though, courts have found insurance companies and insurance agents liable for affirmative misrepresentations, and the courts have stated that an insurance agent who undertakes to procure insurance for someone owes a duty to a client to use reasonable diligence in attempting to place the requested insurance and to inform the client promptly if unable to do so. This was discussed in the Texas Supreme Court case, May v. United Services Association of America, in 1992. Also, this issue was discussed by the Court of Appeals in Houston, in the 1999 case, Frazer v. Texas Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company. In Frazier the court allowed Frazier to go forward with his claim against Texas Farm Bureau Insurance Company and his agent where it is alleged he asked his agent to raise his coverage limits and the agent failed to do so.

The Texas Supreme Court in the case, Kitching v. Zamora, in 1985, stated an agent has a duty to keep the customer informed about the insurance policy’s expiration date when the agent receives information pertaining to the expiration date that is intended for the customer. This was restated by the Texas Court of Appeals of Amarillo, in 1992, in the case Horn v. Hedgecoke Insurance Agency.