In Espinoza v. State Farm Lloyds, Case No. 1:23-CV-751-DII, 2024 WL 4919587 (W.D. Tex. Sept. 16, 2024), an experienced United States District Judge in Texas, the Hon. Robert Pitman, granted the homeowner’s carrier’s motion for summary judgment on all claims.
The basis of all claims was damage allegedly caused by hail during the policy period. The plaintiff-policyholder put forward the report of an expert who may have found hail damage, but affirmatively found that there was no "storm event" on the date of loss alleged by the plaintiff. Espinoza, 2024 WL 4919587, at *5 (“While this statement may raise a fact issue as to whether there is hail damage to the Property, it does not raise any fact issue as to whether the damage occurred during the coverage period of the Policy, let alone the alleged date of loss.”).
Despite opportunities, the plaintiff declined to amend the allegation of the date when the alleged hail damage happened.
The Court fairly reviewed evidence presented by the carrier and evidence presented by the plaintiff. In a knowledgeable application of the law, the Court then granted the carrier’s motion for summary judgment after reviewing the evidence and comparing the evidence to all claims alleged by the policyholder in this case: Breach of contract; “Extra-Contractual Claims,” and claims raised under the Texas Prompt Payment of Claims Act.
All types of experts and other witnesses are presented in first-party claims, including claims under homeowner’s policies as in Espinoza. See an ”Overview of the Participants in the Claim Handling Process” by Dennis J. Wall, § 2:2 in 1 CATASTROPHE CLAIMS / INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR NATURAL AND MAN-MADE DISASTERS (Thomson Reuters Nov. 2024 Edition).
Please read the disclaimer. ©2024 Dennis J. Wall. All rights reserved. Interested in many things including Claims and Bad Faith Law? Sign up for a free subscription to my Substack newsletter.
Comments