Lancer Ins. Co. v. L&Y Trucking LLC, No. 1:23-CV-113-H, 2024 WL 2786049, at *5 (N.D. Tex. May 7, 2024) (granting the underlying plaintiffs' motion to dismiss because the question of the duty to was premature and non-justiciable).
National Trust Insurance Co. v. G Creek Inc., Civ. A. No. 4:22-cv-00860, 2023 WL 6380853 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 29, 2023) (granting summary judgment for the insured on the duty to defend because the allegations were insufficient to show that the insured had knowledge that major structural repairs would be necessary years after an initial leak repair).
Windermere Oaks Water Supply Corp. v. Allied World Specialty Insurance Co., 67 F.4th 672 (5th Cir. 2023) (granting summary for the insured on the duty to defend because the contractual liability exclusion in the public officials and management liability policy did not negate coverage for alleged breaches of fiduciary duties and ultra vires acts).
Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London v. Keystone Dev., LLC, No. 3:21-CV-336-L, 2022 WL 6202129, at *3 (N.D. Tex. Oct. 7, 2022) (holding a duty to defend existed under the “eight corners” rule because the plaintiff's petition alleged facts that possibly implicated coverage under did not allege facts that fell within an exclusion).
Covington Specialty Insurance Co. v. USAI LP, No. 21-10010, 2021 WL 4901485 (5th Cir. 2021) (affirming district court's decision that the insured was entitled to a defense in connection with an underlying wrongful death action).
Centauri Specialty Insurance Company v. Phillips, Civ. A. No. 4:20-cv-02525, 2021 WL 4215481 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 15, 2021) (holding that the insurer breached the duty to defend, failing to establish that accusations against a college student related to a hazing case were not an “occurrence” or, in turn, were subject to the “expected or intended injury” exclusion)
Crum & Forster Specialty Insurance Co. v. Chemicals, Inc.,No. H-20-3493, 2021 WL 3423111 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 5, 2021) (holding that insurer had a duty to defend against date-deprived pleadings even though policy contained a "Continuous and Progress Damage or Injury" condition that altered the insuring agreement)
Admiral Insurance Co. v. K&K Roofing & Construction LLC, No. 1:20-CV-399-LY, 2021 WL 2019201 (W.D. Tex. May 20, 2021) (recommending that the District Court Judge grant the insured's motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction following withdrawal of the insured's tender to its insurer for a defense and indemnity in underlying litigation)
National Liability & Fire Insurance Co. v. Young, 459 F. Supp. 3d 796 (N.D. Tex. 2020) (holding that proposed exception to the “eight corners” rule did not apply, the insurer owed its insured a defense in an underlying wrongful death action, and summary judgment on the duty to indemnify was premature)
Covington Specialty Insurance Co. v. USAI, , L.P., Civ. A. No. 3:18-CV-3271-N, 2020 WL 2132598 (N.D. Tex. May 4, 2020) (holding that the insurer failed to establish the applicability of the “auto” exclusion in a CGL policy to negate its duty to defend an insured for liability claims arising out of a drowning incident in a creek adjacent to the insured's property), aff'd, No. 21-10010, 2021 WL 4901485 (5th Cir. Oct. 20, 2021)
Fish Construction, Inc. v. Pennsylvania Lumbermens Mutual Insurance Co., No. H-19-2079, 2020 WL 6153603 (S.D. Tex. Apr. 9, 2020) (denying a public adjuster's motion to intervene under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a)(2) because the public adjuster failed to show impairment of its interest or inadequacy of representation because the insured and proposed intervenor were aligned in the ultimate objective of the lawsuit)
Mid-Continent Casualty Co. v. Petroleum Solutions, Inc., 917 F.3d 352 (5th Cir. 2019) (holding that the cooperation clause in a CGL policy does not apply to affirmative claim and further holding that generic reservation of rights letters may not be sufficient to reserve rights)
Greystone Multi-Family Builders, Inc. v. Gemini Insurance Co., Civ. A. No. H-17-921, 2018 WL 1579477 (S.D. Tex. Mar. 30, 2018) (finding that an insurer beached its duty to defend and violated the Texas Prompt Payment of Claims Act when it erroneously claimed that the allegations against its insured did not involve “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and that, even if they did, exclusions j.(5), j.(6), m. and a “Fungus or Spore” exclusion applied to negate coverage)
Great American Insurance Co. v. Hamel, 525 S.W.3d 655 (Tex. 2017) (finding that an insured properly assigned its claims against its insurer to third-party judgment creditors under the test set forth in State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Gandy and setting new standards for the fully adversarial trial requirement)
Ewing Construction Co., Inc. v. Amerisure Insurance Co., 420 S.W.3d 30 (Tex. 2014) (finding that allegations that a general contractor failed to perform its work in a good and workmanlike manner that results in “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” does not fall within the “contractual liability” exclusion of a standard-form CGL policy)
Mid-Continent Casualty Co. v. Academy Development, Inc., 2010 WL 3489355 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 24, 2010) (finding that allegations of diminution of value of homes because of leaking lakes sufficiently alleged "property damage" under a standard CGL policy and that insured was entitled to select single policy year to provide complete defense), aff'd, 476 F. App'x 316 (5th Cir. 2012).
Interstate Fire & Casualty Co. v. Southern Tank Leasing, Inc., et al., 2012 WL 1231738 (S.D. Tex. Apr. 12, 2012) (finding CGL carrier had a duty to defend despite auto exclusion)
Pendergest-Holt, et al. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's of London, 681 F. Supp. 2d 816 (S.D. Tex.), aff'd and modified in part, 600 F. 3d 562 (5th Cir. 2010) (preliminary injunction against Underwriters in connection with D&O coverage)
Harleysville Lake States Ins. Co. v. Granite Ridge Builders, Inc., 2009 WL 857412 (N.D. Ind. Mar. 31, 2009) (holding insurer was estopped from raising coverage defenses because of a failure to properly reserve rights)
Middlesex Ins. Co. v. PBC Operations, L.P., 2009 WL 3756842 (W.D. Tex Nov. 5, 2009) (holding that insurer had a duty to defend against trade dress infringement claims and further holding that "first publication" exclusion did not apply)
Lamar Homes, Inc. v. Mid-Continent Cas. Co., 242 S.W.3d 1 (Tex. 2007) (answering certified questions in favor of policyholder on "property damage" and "occurrence" issues as well as the "prompt payment of claims" act)
Boss Management Services, Inc. v. Acceptance Ins. Co., 2007 WL 2752700 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 19, 2007) (finding multiple insurers triggered for duty to defend purposes)
Archon Investments, Inc. v. Great American Ins. Co., 174 S.W.3d 334 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Aug 25, 2005, pet denied.) (holding insurer breached the duty to defend against allegations of defective workmanship)
Global Sun Pools, Inc. v. Burlington Ins. Co., 2004 WL 878283 (Tex. App.–Dallas Apr. 26, 2004, no pet.) (finding in favor of additional insured status based on "eight corners" rule)
Luxury Living, Inc. v. Mid-Continent Cas. Co., 2003 WL 22116202 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 10, 2003) (holding insurer breached duty to defend and violated the Texas Insurance Code)
Mt. Hawley Ins. Co. v. Steve Roberts Custom Builders, Inc., 215 F. Supp. 2d 783 (E.D. Tex. 2002) (holding insurer breached duty to defend and, in doing so, violated article 21.55 of the Texas Insurance Code)
