We here at DC Law Firm are making a difference. We are not only resolving cases for favorable awards as seen below, but are establishing favorable laws for all Property Owners in Texas.
Property Insurance/Bad Faith/Trial
DC Law prides itself on the highest quality legal briefing, which can help lead to pretrial success for its clients. DC Law has helped shape case law by obtaining numerous successful rulings and opinions from federal and state court judges against some the largest insurance companies and defense law firms in the country. These court opinions cover important topics like violations of the Texas Insurance Code, insurance contract interpretation, “cosmetic damage exclusions,” expert qualifications, how to measure damages when an insurance company denies a claim, and the recovery of attorneys fees and costs.
A sample of important rulings is below:
Marshall Mall v. Allied Ins. Co., 2:21-CV-00109-RWS (E.D. Tex. July 5, 2023) [Dkt. 184] (Denying insurance company’s various motions for summary judgment and motions to strike Plaintiff’s experts)
Valleyview Church v. Church Mut. Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124229, *11, (N.D. Tex. July 13, 2022) (Denying insurance company’s motions as to bad faith claims because, “to the extent the policy affords coverage, extra-contractual claims remain viable”)
Yin v. Aspen Sepcialty Ins. Co., 6:20-cv-00153 (E.D. Tex. June 17, 2022) [Dkt. 180] (Affirming jury verdict against insurance company and finding plaintiff was entitled to full “expectancy damages” following successful jury verdict).
Gardenbure v. Century Surety Co., 6:21-CV-00873-ADA (W.D. Tex. Feb. 7, 2023) [Dkts. 50 and 52] (Finding that insurance company’s action withholding underwriting file created a fact issue as to bad faith)
The Hub v. Arch Specialty Ins. Co., 5:21-CV-180-H-BQ (N.D. Tex. March 21, 2023) [Dkt. 94] (Denying insurance company’s motions for summary judgment on bad faith and denying motions to exclude Plaintiff’s experts)
Humprhie v. State Farm Lloyds, 3:20-cv-001163-x (N.D. Tex. May 18, 2023) [DKt. 101] (Awarding attorney’s fees to Plaintiff after successful jury trial and finding DC fees “are reasonable and necessary”)
Mantzuranis v. State Farm Lloyds, 3:21-cv-01486-M (N.D. Tex. Dec. 2, 2022) [DKt. 90] (Awarding attorney’s fees to Plaintiff and entering judgment against State Farm following successful jury verdict)