HB 930 Insurance
Rep. Kenneth Sheets (R-Dallas)
HB 930 repeals Subchapter H, Chapter 544, Texas Insurance Code, which restricts an insurer from applying standard underwriting guidelines for water damage claims. The bill also enables claims for losses caused by natural disasters to be made under a standard homeowners, fire, or farm and ranch owners policies and permits an insurer to assess premium surcharges and increase deductibles in accordance with sound actuarial principles. Finally, the bill provides that an insurer may not refuse to renew a policy unless the insured has filed two or more claims under the policy in any three-year period (current law requires three or more claims) and specifies that an insurer may refuse to renew a policy for reasons other than claims history.
HB 1407 Insurance
Rep. John Smithee (R-Amarillo)
This bill, filed by the chair of the House Insurance Committee, requires the commissioner of insurance to adopt rules ensuring “prompt and equitable settlement of a third-party property damage claim.” The bill calls for quick settlement standards in circumstances in which the insured’s liability is reasonably clear, and the amount of the claim is within policy limits. The bill applies to any insurer that delivers, issues for delivery, or renews a Texas private passenger automobile insurance policy. Under the bill, the minimum standards must include reasonable deadlines for the insurer to acknowledge and pay a claim, the required notice the insurer must provide to the claimant or the insured, and the items, statements, and forms that an insurer may require a claimant or insured to submit in relation to the claim. An insurer is required to comply with the standards.
The bill also contains provisions relating to arbitration of claims. A claimant may require an insurer to submit a dispute concerning the payment, amount, or denial of a claim to binding arbitration. A claimant who elects arbitration waives the right to bring an action against the insured or insurer (except to enforce the arbitration award), and agrees to accept payment for the claim within the policy limits. Arbitration is generally governed by Chapter 171, CPRC, though the commissioner shall adopt rules governing the procedures for requesting and conducting an arbitration, for selecting one or more arbitrators to conduct the proceeding, the qualifications of arbitrators, and procedures for the payment of the costs of arbitration. TDI must also compile and maintain a list of qualified arbitrators.
Finally, HB 1407 prohibits an insurer from delivering or renewing a Texas private passenger automobile insurance policy unless the policy or endorsement includes a provision that requires the insurer to participate in binding arbitration under the above provisions.
HB 1408 Insurance
Rep. John Smithee (R-Amarillo)
This bill applies exclusively to claims arising under insurance policies issued by the Fair Access to Insurance Requirements (FAIR) Plan Association, which in Texas is a state-run plan, subsidized by private insurance companies, to make property insurance available to those who cannot obtain it in the voluntary market. These plans were originally established by the federal government following the urban demonstrations and riots of the 1960s when it determined that, because of deteriorating social and economic circumstances in urban areas, it became impossible for many business owners and homeowners to purchase property insurance.
The bill proposes to amend Chapter 2211 of the Insurance Code by establishing dispute resolution procedures for property damage claims filed under a FAIR Plan, and by establishing exclusive remedies for a claim against the association, agent or representative. Under the bill, a claimant can bring an action against the association only if the association has denied a claim, and must first submit to mediation or moderated settlement conference under Chapter 154, Civil Practice and Remedies Code. The claimant may then initiate an action in the district court of the county in which the loss occurred.
This bill applies exclusively to claims arising under insurance policies issued by the Fair Access to Insurance Requirements (FAIR) Plan Association, which in Texas is a state-run plan, subsidized by private insurance companies, to make property insurance available to those who cannot obtain it in the voluntary market. These plans were originally established by the federal government following the urban demonstrations and riots of the 1960s when it determined that, because of deteriorating social and economic circumstances in urban areas, it became impossible for many business owners and homeowners to purchase property insurance.
HB 1325 MDL Asbestos and Silica
Rep. Doug Miller (R-New Braunfels)
Actions pending in the MDL on September 1, 2005 (the date the medical criteria requirements took effect) and in which the claimant has not served a report meeting the medical criteria, the MDL court must dismiss the action on motion of a defendant. The claimant may show good cause as to why the action should not be dismissed.
HB 1325 additionally provides that in an action pending on September 1, 2005, in which the claimant does not serve a complying medical report before the later of March 1, 2014 or the 181st day after the date the action is transferred to the MDL court, the court may on its own motion dismiss the action unless a claimant shows good cause to maintain the action. Dismissal is without prejudice. If a claimant subsequently suffers an asbestos or silica-related injury, the claimant may refile the claim under the law as it existed on the date the case was originally filed.
HB 1126 Judicial Campaign Funding
Rep. Rafael Anchia (D-Dallas)
HB 1126 would establish a public financing system for elections to the Supreme Court, Court of Criminal Appeals, and Courts of Appeals. Under the proposal, a candidate could request public financing by filing a petition signed by a specified number of qualified voters who also make a minimum contribution to the candidate’s campaign. Once the Texas Ethics Commission declares that a candidate has met the eligibility standards, the candidate may start receiving distributions from the fund and may no longer accept contributions from private contributors or benefit from direct campaign expenditures on the candidate’s behalf. The fund would be composed of any amounts appropriated or gifted, as well as by civil penalties levied by the commission.
HB 1254 Consumer Lawsuit Lending
Rep. Senfronia Thompson (D-Houston)
HB 1254 establishes a regulatory framework for entities that provide funding for consumer litigation. HB 1254 defines a “civil justice funding company” as a person that enters into a contract with a consumer to provide non-recourse financing for the consumer’s legal claim in return for a contingent right to receive an amount of the proceeds of a settlement, judgment, award, or verdict obtained on the consumer’s behalf. The bill specifies that a civil justice funding transaction may not be considered a loan or subject to state laws governing loans (including limits on interest rates). Moreover, a civil justice funding transaction that complies with this law is not subject to any other state law governing loans or investment contracts. The bill also establishes a list of criteria in order to conduct civil justice funding in Texas.
HB1595 Consumer Lawsuit Lending
Rep. Doug Miller (R-New Braunfels)
Under this bill, consumer lawsuit lending transactions would be subjected to Texas usury and regulatory laws in the same manner as a loan for personal, family, or household use. The bill also requires disclosure of consumer lawsuit lending transactions to the court and to an opposing party.
the bill defines a “consumer” as an individual who is or may become a complaining party in a dispute and to whom money is provided in a consumer lawsuit lending transaction. A “consumer lawsuit lender” is a person that provides money to a consumer, but does not include an attorney who has an attorney-client relationship with the consumer concerning the consumer’s dispute. The bill applies to any dispute, whether a civil action, ADR proceeding, or an administrative proceeding before a state agency.
The bill characterizes non-recourse advances from a consumer lawsuit lender, the repayment of which is conditioned on the consumer’s recovery in the dispute, as a “loan” for purposes of Texas consumer finance laws (Chapter 342, Finance Code). This law regulates the terms, conditions, and interest that may be charged on a consumer loans and requires consumer lenders to be licensed.
In addition to the regulation of consumer lawsuit lending transactions, HB 1595 requires the plaintiff in a civil action to produce to the opposing party, without a discovery request, all documents that the plaintiff or plaintiff’s representative provided to the consumer lawsuit lender. It also requires the plaintiff to file with the court and serve on the opposing party a copy of any agreement between the plaintiff and lender. If the lending agreement is executed prior to filing the lawsuit, the information must accompany the plaintiff’s original petition. If it is executed after the action is filed, the agreement must be filed and served not later than 10 days after execution. A parallel provision applies in an alternative dispute resolution proceeding under Chapter 154, CPRC.
SB 635 & HB 1445 Funds to Legal Aid
February 19, 2013
SB 635 by Sen. Robert Duncan (R-Lubbock) and its companion, HB 1445 by Rep. Senfronia Thompson (D-Houston)
These bills would boost funding for legal services for the indigent. The bill directs civil restitution recovered by the attorney general in an action arising from a violation of consumer protection, public health, or general welfare law to the judicial fund for a program approved by the Supreme Court. The bill has limitations on the nature of the recovery that can be directed to the legal aid fund.
HB 200 Utility Liability for Allowing Recreational Use of Land
February 18, 2013
Rep. Jim Murphy (R-Houston)
This bill proposes that an electric utility located in Harris County may contract with a political subdivision to allow public access to and use of the utility’s premises for recreational purposes without assuming the risk of personal injury or property damage. HB 200 provides that a utility providing public access for recreation, exercise, relaxation, travel, or pleasure does not:
(1) assure that the premises are safe for those purposes;
(2) owe to a person entering the premises for those purposes a greater degree of care than is owed a trespasser; or
(3) assume responsibility or incur liability for personal injury, death, property damage, or the act of a third party that occurs on the premises.
The bill does not limit the liability of the utility for serious bodily injury or death of a person proximately caused by the utility’s wilful or wanton acts or gross negligence with respect to a dangerous condition existing on the premises. The limitation on liability in the bill applies only to a cause of action brought by a person who enters the premises for recreational purposes or accompanies another person entering the premises for those purposes. The bill further provides that the doctrine of attractive nuisance does not apply.
Finally, the bill allows an interlocutory appeal from a denial of a motion for summary judgment by a utility in a suit governed by this law.
SB 1/HB 1 – General Appropriations Bills–Judicial Branch Funding–Legal Aid Funding
Sen. Tommy Williams (R – The Woodlands) and Rep. Jim Pitts (R – Waxahachie)
These bills impact funding of the courts. The state appropriations for the judicial branch of government account for less than one percent of all state appropriations. The House’s proposed budget provides for $187.7 billion in spending over the next two years.
Funding for the Judiciary (Article IV) in both bills totals $640.9 million, which is a decrease of $7.2 million (or 1.1%) from the current biennium. One of the most notable decreases comes in the form of a $2.3 million per-fiscal-year cut in General Revenue funding for Basic Civil Legal Services.
This bill includes $13 million in funding for legal aid in the Texas Supreme Court budget, a decrease of $4.6 million from current appropriations. On Wednesday, the House Appropriations Committee restored the funding to current levels.
HB 129 – Requiring Judicial Recusal Based on Political Contributions
Rep. Richard Raymond (D- Laredo)
This bill require justices on the Supreme Court and judges on the Court of Criminal Appeals to “recuse himself or herself from any case in which the justice or judge has in the preceding four years accepted political contributions…in a total amount of $2,500 or more” from “(1) a party to the case, (2) attorney of record in the case, (3) the law firm of an attorney of record in the case, (4) the managing agent of a party to the case, (5) a member of the board of directors of a party to the case, or (6) a general-purpose committee…that is established or administered by a person who is a party to the case.·
HB 134 – Abolishment of the Court of Criminal Appeals/HJR 36 – Constitutional Amendment to Abolish the Court of Criminal Appeals
Rep. Raymond
This bill and resolution would abolish the Court of Criminal Appeals and give jurisdiction of criminal appeals to the Texas Supreme Court.
HB 293 – Release and Use of Information Maintained by the State Bar of Texas
Rep. Eddie Rodriguez (D – Austin)
This bill would require the State Bar of Texas to provide lawyers’ names, bar card numbers and email addresses to an accredited continuing legal education provider affiliated with a state agency, including a public law school. The provider could only use a lawyer’s email address to notify him about CLE activities.
HB 325 – HJR 54 – Constitutional Amendment Establishing Boundaries of Public Beaches
Rep. Harold Dutton, Jr. (D – Houston)
This bill and resolution would overturn the Texas Supreme Court’s decision in Severance v. Patterson. Specifically, the legislation would, among other things, amend the Texas Natural Resources Code to define the “public beach” as extending from the mean low-tide line to the line of vegetation. According to the bill, although forces of nature may shift the vegetation line, the public would retain a right of use, “by virtue of continuous right in the public since time immemorial, as recognized in law and custom.” It would also create “an offense” for anyone to create an “obstruction, barrier, or restraint” that interfered with public access. The legislation would further require a beachfront property seller to include a statement in the contract warning the buyer about “legal and economic risks.” Among other things, the statement would warn a buyer that erosion or storms could cast the property on a public beach, and if so, the state could sue the owner to remove the house at his own expense.
HB 586 – Waiver of Sovereign Immunity for Certain Claims Arising out of Contracts with State Agencies (Companion Bill: SB 296)
Rep. Paul Workman (R – Austin)
This bill and and SB 296, authored by Sen. Bob Deuell (R – Greenville), would waive sovereign and governmental immunity for certain contract claims against state agencies in which the amount in controversy exceeds $250,000 and limit damages to amounts “due and owed” under a contract with a state agency and interest allowed by law. Consequential damages, exemplary damages, damages for “unabsorbed home office overhead,” and attorney fees (unless otherwise expressly provided for in the contract) would not be recoverable. (Note: The waivers of immunity and damage limitation provisions in these bills are similar to those that already exist for contracts with local government entities. See §§ 271.151-271.160 of the Local Government Code). Similar legislation was filed in 2011, but died in the House before it could be called for a vote.
HJR 37 – Constitutional Amendment to Change the Terms of District Court Judges to Six Years
HJR 37, resolution authored by Rep. Raymond, would increase the terms of district court judges to six years.
SB 103 – Elimination of Straight Ticket Voting for Judicial Offices
Sen. Dan Patrick (R – Houston)
This bill would eliminate straight ticket voting for judicial offices.
SB 392 – Notice to the Attorney General of Challenges to the Constitutionality of Texas Statutes
This bill would amend the Texas Government Code to place the obligation of notifying the attorney general of constitutional challenges to Texas statutes on the party raising the constitutional question instead of the court clerks. During the 2011 legislative session, HB 2425was passed requiring courts and clerks to notify the attorney general of constitutional challenges to Texas statutes filed in their court. However, according to a Texas Judicial Councilresolution addressing the topic, most clerks have found it difficult to comply with the 82nd Legislature’s directive due to resource limitations.
[This report includes contributions from Jerry Bullard, Adams, Lynch & Loftin, P.C., co-chair of the Legislative Liaison Committee of the Appellate Section of the State Bar of Texas along reports from the State Bar of Texas, Texas Civil Justice League, the Texas Association of Defense Counsel and the random scurrilous rumors on the street.]
The Austin Bar Legislative Update is a membership benefit of the Austin Bar Association