Originally published by David Coale.
An insurer failed to show prejudice, and thus could not take advantage of a “consent-to-settle” provision in an uninsured motorist first-party policy. The key Texas Supreme Court case “did not recognize difficulty in proving the value of a potential subrogation claim as sufficient prejudice”; to the contrary, it “indicates that the only kind of prejudice sufficient to make a consent-to-settlement breach material is loss of a valuable subrogation right[.]” And the insurer also failed to conclusively prove a loss of value, even under its view of the law. Davis v. State Farm Lloyds, No. 05-18-00969-CV (Nov. 12, 2019) (mem. op.).
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
from Texas Bar Today https://ift.tt/2CRuxKg
via Abogado Aly Website
No comments:
Post a Comment