 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
First General Realty Corp. v. Maryland Casualty Co.11/30/1998
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 126TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 428,878, HONORABLE JOHN K. DIETZ, JUDGE PRESIDING
We withdraw our original opinion and judgment issued August 13, 1998, and substitute this one in its place. The main issue presented in this appeal is whether an agreed judgment as to liability between a third party and an insured is binding on the insurer. Appellants First General Realty Corporation, et al. sued appellees Maryland Casualty Company, et al. for damages under several theories and requested declaratory judgment that appellees were obligated to provide insurance coverage. After a bench trial, the trial court rendered a take-nothing judgment in favor of appellees. Appellants filed a motion for new trial which the trial court denied; they now appeal that order. We will affirm the trial-court judgment.
BACKGROUND
The appellants in this cause consist of the plaintiffs (the "Developers") and the intervenors (the "Homeowners"). The appellees are the defendant insurance companies which we refer to collectively as "Maryland."
The Stipulated Facts
Both appellants and appellees stipulate to the following facts:
"The Developers were involved in the development of the River Plantation subdivision in Montgomery County, Texas. The Homeowners are various individuals who purchased property in River Plantation prior to 1985. A series of floods affected the River Plantation subdivision, particularly in 1973, 1976, 1979, and 1983. The floods caused physical damage to the property and structures, and a substantial number of Homeowners suffered a loss of the use and enjoyment of their land or diminution in property value."
The Homeowners brought suit against the Developers in 1985 (the "Thompson" suit), alleging that various wrongful acts, including negligence, caused them to suffer damages in 1983. In a subsequent petition, they alleged that prior to and during 1973, the Developers were negligent in failing to disclose to prospective purchasers that certain sections of the subdivision had a propensity to flood. The Fireman's Fund Insurance Company, which had issued an occurrence-type commercial comprehensive general liability policy insuring some of the Developers, assumed the primary defense of the Thompson suit.
Maryland had written policies of primary and excess insurance for the Developers for the policy periods in 1973, 1974, 1975, and 1976. Maryland acknowledges that the 1973 flood was an "occurrence" as defined in its primary policy and excess policy in existence at that time and that coverage for the 1973 flood would be provided under both policies.
The parties agree that the Developers had notice of claims by Homeowners arising by reason of the 1973 flood during the 1973-74 time frame. However, Maryland did not receive notice of any claims under its 1973 general liability policy until July 1987. An attorney for the Developers sent a letter notifying Maryland of the Homeowners' claims against the Developers in the Thompson suit and enclosed a copy of the Fourth Amended Petition which was the first pleading to assert any occurrence in 1973 or claim involving the 1973 flood. Maryland participated in some joint defense meetings and settlement Discussions with the Developers and the Homeowners between 1987 and 1990. Maryland undertook limited investigation of the claims; ultimately, Maryland did not provide the Developers with a defense to the Thompson suit and made no payment toward settlement of the Homeowner's claims. No Maryland policy provided coverage for the 1979 and 1983 claims asserted.
In December 1990, the H
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Texas Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|