Navigating the complexities of insurance law in appellate courts requires the ability to communicate effectively with judges and staff attorneys who may be unfamiliar with insurance law.
Most construction project participants procure insurance through a traditional approach: each project participant acquires their own insurance as required in their contracts.
It is well-settled Texas law that plaintiffs are prevented from directly suing a defendant’s insurer unless and until a final judgment or settlement has resolved the litigation at issue. A related line of cases sets out when a third party (not the insured) can bind a non-participating insurer to an underlying judgment or settlement.
Texas law has long disfavored the now uncommon practice of liability insurers “soliciting a contribution to a settlement from its insured without first committing its own policy limits.” The Supreme Court of Texas was recently faced with such a situation.
Last March, the Texas Supreme Court issued its opinion in Richards v. State Farm Lloyds, unanimously ratifying the “Eight Corners” Rule as a settled feature of Texas law. However, the Court set the stage for future challenge to this consensus when it noted the “Eight Corners” Rule could “possibly” be “subject…to exceptions.” Which exceptions? How many exceptions? It appears we may soon find out.