In responding to a certified question from the Fifth Circuit in Richards v. State Farm Lloyds, the Texas Supreme Court held that the “policy-language exception” to the eight-corners rule articulated by the federal district court is not a permissible exception under Texas law. See Richards v. State Farm Lloyds, 19-0802, 2020 WL 1313782, at *1 (Tex. Mar. 20, 2020). The eight-corners rule generally provides that Texas courts may only consider the four corners of the petition and the four corners of the applicable insurance policy when determining whether a duty to defend exists. State Farm argued that a “policy-language exception” prevents application of the eight-corners rule unless the insurance policy explicitly requires the insurer to defend “all actions against its insured no matter if the allegations of the suit are groundless, false or fraudulent,” relying on B. Hall Contracting Inc. v. Evanston Ins. Co., 447 F. Supp. 2d 634, 645 (N.D. Tex. 2006). The Texas Supreme Court rejected the insurer’s argument, citing Texas’ long history of applying the eight-corners rule without regard for the presence or absence of a “groundless-claims” clause.
Latest Post
More Posts
Texas Federal Court Rejects Insurer’s Defenses to Fracking Claim
Insurer Breached Duty to Defend in Social Engineering Scam
Texas Court Says Insurer Liable Under EPL Policy for Award in Dispute Between Co-Founders of Private Equity Firm
Texas Supreme Court Holds that Invoking Appraisal Provision and Paying Appraisal Amount Does Not Insulate an Insurer from Damages Under the Texas Prompt Payment of Claims Act
Federal Court Rejects Insurer’s Narrow Interpretation of Securities Insuring Agreement and Applies Notice-Prejudice Rule to Financial Institution Bond
Coverage for “Counterfeit” Securities: Imitation of an Original vs. Imitation of the Original
First Circuit Rules Settlement Agreement Can Trigger Excess Insurance Coverage Under Policy Language, But This Settlement Did Not
Federal Court Says Wrongdoer’s False Statement In Application Does Not Permit Carrier To Rescind Financial Institution Bond And Avoid $3 Million Loss
D&O Policy’s “Final Adjudication” Provision Requires More Than A Trial Court Judgment
Subscribe: Subscribe via RSS
Firm/Org