Home/Case Law/CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S v. Smith
Regular Panel Decision DecisionOrder

CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S v. Smith

Filed: Dec 05, 2002
Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)
14-00-00391-CV

CompFox AI Summary

This case concerns an appeal that was initially abated due to a settlement involving a minor, Brandon William Hendrix, and subsequently dismissed after trial court approval. The Court of Appeals for the Fourteenth District of Texas, Houston, had previously issued opinions on April 25, 2002, which it later voted to withdraw after a motion for rehearing by Angela M. Smith. Chief Justice Scott Brister dissented from the withdrawal, arguing that the underlying legal issue of an employer's insurable interest in its employees, particularly in the context of non-subscribing employers and potential pecuniary losses, is of significant public interest. He criticized the precedent set by Tamez v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London, which he believes narrowly defines insurable interests and could lead to mass torts, advocating for a liberal construction of Texas insurance law to reflect modern employer liabilities.

CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S v. Smith is a workers' compensation case decided in Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston). This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.

It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston).

Full Decision Text1 Pages

This case concerns an appeal that was initially abated due to a settlement involving a minor, Brandon William Hendrix, and subsequently dismissed after trial court approval. The Court of Appeals for the Fourteenth District of Texas, Houston, had previously issued opinions on April 25, 2002, which it later voted to withdraw after a motion for rehearing by Angela M. Smith. Chief Justice Scott Brister dissented from the withdrawal, arguing that the underlying legal issue of an employer's insurable interest in its employees, particularly in the context of non-subscribing employers and potential pecuniary losses, is of significant public interest. He criticized the precedent set by Tamez v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London, which he believes narrowly defines insurable interests and could lead to mass torts, advocating for a liberal construction of Texas insurance law to reflect modern employer liabilities.

Read the full decision

Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.

CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S v. Smith workers compensation case in Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston). Legal case summary, ruling, and analysis for attorneys and legal research.

CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S v. Smith case law summary from Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston). Workers compensation legal decision, case analysis, and court ruling details.

CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S v. Smith Case Analysis

CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S v. Smith is a legal case related to workers' compensation in Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston). This case explains important rulings, legal interpretations, and claim decisions.

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.