Schnatzmeyer v. State Farm Ins. Co., No. 3:23-CV-02820-K, 2025 WL 1697505, at *1 (N.D. Tex. June 17, 2025). In a case involving two overlapping freeze claims—and a substantial array of legal issues affecting insurers in...more
In PAJ, Inc. v. Hanover Ins. Co., the Texas Supreme Court set forth the “notice-prejudice rule,” which states that unless an insurer was prejudiced by an insured’s delay in giving timely notice of its claim or suit, an...more
The parent of an infant sued Kim Eichle for Eichle’s alleged negligence in serving alcohol to her houseguest, Jacob Russo, who allegedly assaulted the infant, and for negligence in failing to keep the sidewalk at her...more
In most circumstances involving an insurer’s extension of coverage for a property loss, an appraisal provision in an insurance policy provides an insured and an insurer a mechanism by which to resolve disagreements regarding...more
In Hinojos v. State Farm Lloyds, the Supreme Court of Texas addressed liability under the Texas Prompt Payment of Claims Act (the “TPPCA”) when an insurer timely pays only part of a claim....more
In response to the wave of litigation over COVID-19-related business income claims, an overwhelming majority of courts considering the relevant policy language — approximately 80% — have found no coverage as a matter of law...more
One practice that has plagued the insurance industry in recent years has been contractors soliciting homeowners to make insurance claims after a hailstorm, for example, and then obtaining an assignment of rights to the claim...more
Appraisers are frequently involved in Florida property claims. Accordingly, Florida courts continue to refine the roles and limitations with respect to appraisers and the appraisal process as a whole. ...more
A property insurer, having paid for covered damage, can recover the loss by seeking reimbursement from its insured where the insured has recovered funds from a responsible third-party, or the insurer may pursue a claim...more
Ortiz v. State Farm Lloyds, No. 04-17-00252-CV, 2017 WL 5162315 (Tex. Ct. App. Nov. 8, 2017). Oscar Ortiz submitted a claim to State Farm for damage to his property resulting from wind and a hailstorm. After inspecting the...more
This week the Eighth Circuit issued its long-awaited decision in a class action against State Farm involving the “labor depreciation” issue that I have covered extensively on this blog. State Farm prevailed on both the merits...more
There have been two recent federal district court decisions in the widespread class action litigation involving the application of depreciation to the labor cost component of replacement cost value on property insurance...more
In recent years, the number of Texas lawsuits arising from hail-damage claims to residential and commercial properties has reached staggering levels, leaving the courts in several Texas counties struggling to keep up with...more
In Tidwell Enterprises v. Financial Pacific Ins. Co. (No. C078665, filed 11/29/16), a California appeals court held that that even though a house fire occurred after the policy period, there was nonetheless a possibility of...more
I have had a busy summer and am overdue in updating readers on recent decisions in class actions against insurers involving the “labor depreciation” issue. The issue involves whether, when insurers estimate the “actual cash...more
Virtually all property insurance policies contain an appraisal clause, which outlines the appraisal procedure in broad terms. Those broad terms sometimes do not provide much guidance about the process, or about the effect...more
In February this blog commented on Washington State’s newly-adopted definition of “collapse” in property insurance policies that contain no specific definition of the term. (Observer, February 8, 2016, Common Sense Prevails: ...more
For years, property insurance policies that exclude rot damage have been called upon to cover rot because the policies extend coverage to “collapse”—an undefined term—caused by hidden decay, even if the structure remains...more
Texas courts have long taken the position that “[w]hen covered and excluded perils combine to cause an injury, the insured must present some evidence affording the jury a reasonable basis on which to allocate damages.”...more