Bringing Family Law Expertise to SCOTX | Justice Debra Lehrmann | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Potential Changes to SCOTX Petition Practice | Justice Evan Young | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
An Unexpected Path to the Appellate Bench | Justice Rebeca Huddle | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Texas Supreme Court Draws Line on Attorney Immunity Privilege
Handling the Texas Supreme Court’s Public Information | Osler McCarthy | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Paths to Texas Judicial Selection Reform | Chief Justice Tom Phillips | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Delaware Supreme Court concludes that a letter from a lawyer informing an insured of possible lawsuits without identifying potential plaintiffs or demanding payment is not a “claim for damages” within the meaning of...more
A previous update analyzed the critical case of Monroe Guaranty Ins. Co. v. Bitco Gen. Ins. Corp., where the Texas Supreme Court recognized an exception to Texas’s “eight corners rule” but found the exception inapplicable to...more
Last year, the Texas Supreme Court adopted a narrow exception to the state’s eight-corners rule, and allowed the consideration of extrinsic evidence to determine the duty to defend. The exception arguably raised more...more
A recent ruling in Texas has given insurers another arrow in their quiver when determining whether they have a duty to defend in cases where coverage may not exist. In Monroe Guaranty Ins. Co. v. Bitco Gen. Ins. Corp., the...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently applied the newly adopted Texas Supreme Court decision outlining those circumstances in which extrinsic evidence may be used to determine an insurer's duty to defend...more
Texas practitioners can add a new term to their legal vocabulary: “the Monroe exception.” The Texas Supreme Court has finally weighed in on whether to create an exception to the eight corners rule when determining if an...more
In February, the Supreme Court of Texas issued two opinions important to Texas’s duty-to-defend analysis. First, the court settled a split among Texas appellate courts by endorsing a limited exception to the eight-corners...more
For decades, an insurer’s duty to defend under Texas law was determined exclusively by reviewing the insurance contract and the allegations of the complaint under the “eight-corners rule.” All of this changed last week when,...more
On February 11, 2022, the Texas Supreme Court handed the insurance industry an overall victory in an inter-insurer dispute by recognizing an exception to the "eight corners rule" permitting insurers to rely upon extrinsic...more
Welcome to CICR’s annual recap of insurance cases you should know about — and others in the pipeline to watch. You can read about our selections for “Cases to Know” and “Cases to Watch” below. In the last year, we saw...more
The Texas Supreme Court has accepted certified questions from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to clarify Texas’ eight-corners rule for determining the existence of a duty to defend....more
In another dispute over insurance coverage related to the Macondo Well blowout (a/k/a Deep Water Horizon incident),1 the Texas Supreme Court held that an endorsement reducing a policy’s limits for “liability” stemming from a...more
In Great American Insurance Co. v. Hamel, 2017 WL 2623067 (Tex. June 16, 2017), the Texas Supreme Court more precisely defined the circumstances under which an insurance company that wrongfully fails to defend an insured may...more
As any company facing EPA administrative action under CERCLA knows, the financial risk and defense costs associated with those proceedings can be the same as the risk and costs of an EPA lawsuit under CERCLA. But insurers...more
Five Lessons Health Care Companies Should Learn From Cyberattacks - The American health care industry is under attack by sophisticated hackers seeking access to electronic medical records. Since January, three health...more
California Court: Rejected Demand Within Policy Limits Not Necessary for Bad Faith Claim - Why it matters: Insurers must proceed with caution when they become aware that a settlement within policy limits is possible,...more
In McGinnes Industrial Maintenance Corporation v. The Phoenix Insurance Company, No. 14-0465, —S.W.3d— (Tex. June 26, 2015), a 5-4 majority of the Texas Supreme Court held that the undefined term “suit” in the standard-form...more
On June 26, 2015, the Texas Supreme Court held that enforcement proceedings under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (“CERCLA”)—including the issuance of a “PRP letter” notifying...more