Head Industrial Coatings & Services Inc. v. Maryland Insurance Co.7/29/1998
ous Judgments Judgment # 1:
Nelson v. Texas Utilities/v/Head May 11, 1992 (Personal injury case) $1,889,395 For injuries/non-contractual $37,792 Attorney's fees
Judgment # 2:
Nelson/Head v. Maryland December 9, 1993 (Insurance contract case) Above recovery AND Interest on that recovery AND 40% of total as attorney's fees (Also penalties that have since been removed) The total recovery was about $4.3 million
Our Opinion on Appeal:
August 31, 1995 Head recovers: Contractual interest on the original PI amount until the second judgment Policy Limits of $500,000 Postjudgment interest after December 9, 1993 40% of total as attorney's fees
Supreme Court Opinion:
October 18, 1996 Head recovers: Policy Limits ($500,000) Prejudgment Interest Postjudgment Interest Attorney's fees as found by jury
The Trial Court's judgment on remand assessing damages:
August 7, 1997
Head recovers:
• $500,000.00 - the face value of the policy
• $37,792.00 -- "actual damages" representing defense costs and attorney's fees incurred by Head in defending the underlying suit
• $74,931.00 - prejudgment interest on the $500,000, calculated from November 10, 1990 through May 11, 1992
• $310,067.71 - "Supplementary Payments" in the form of postjudgment interest on the judgment of $1,889,395 in the underlying suit, calculated from May 11, 1992 through December 9, 1993
• $369,116.28- attorney's fees (40% of total recovery)
• $338,479.60 - prejudgment interest from December 9, 1993 through July 29, 1997
TOTAL AWARD: $1,630,386.59
OUR INITIAL OPINION AS TO DAMAGES
In our original opinion, we modified the judgment by reducing actual damages to $500,000 plus $37,792 in attorney's fees in the underlying suit, plus prejudgment interest of 10% in the underlying suit on the policy amount from November 10, 1990 until May 11, 1992, plus 10% interest from May 11, 1992 on $1,889,395.37 until December 9, 1993, plus double damages, plus 40% of the total as attorney's fees in the present case, plus postjudgment interest on the entire amount of the judgment from the date of the judgment.
THE SUPREME COURT'S OPINION AS TO DAMAGES
The Supreme Court's opinion, in relevant part, reads as follows:
Hence, we hold that Nelson/Head are entitled to recover against Maryland for breach of contract damages equal to the $500,000 policy limits and defense costs in the PI suit. These damages are not trebled, and for the reasons explained by the court of appeals, are not subject to penalty under Article 21.55 of the Insurance Code. We also agree with the court of appeals that Nelson/Head failed to prove any other damages. Nelson/Head are also entitled to prejudgment and postjudgment interest, and attorney fees as found by the jury. Inasmuch as Maryland has incurred no extra-contractual liability, it is not entitled to recover against Gans & Smith.
Accordingly, the Court grants Maryland's application for writ of error, denies Nelson/Head's and Gans & Smith's applications for writ of error, and without hearing argument, reverses the judgment of the court of appeals and remands the case to the district court for rendition of judgment in accordance with this opinion. TEX. R. APP. P. 170.
Maryland Ins. Co., 938 S.W.2d at 29 (emphasis added).
The Supreme Court concludes by saying that the cause is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings in conformity with the of this Court. Although Head asked the Supreme Court to clari
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Texas Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|