Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London v. Smith
Court of Appeals of Texas
1ConcurrenceScott Brister, Chief Justice
As the trial judge whose summary judgment was reversed by this Court in Tamez v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, 999 S.W.2d 12 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1998, pet. denied), I confess I remain unconvinced. I agree an employer must show an “insurable interest” in its employees; I disagree that term should be limited to the meaning it had in 19⅛2. Perhaps in 1942, companies never expected to spend a dime when employees died on the job, except for “key men.” If so, those days are over. Nevertheless, because Tamez governs this appeal short of en banc consideration, see O’Connor v.…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- O'CONNOR v. First Court of AppealsTexas Supreme Court · 1992
- Griffin v. McCoachSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- McBride v. ClaytonTexas Supreme Court · 1942
- McCain v. YostTexas Supreme Court · 1955
- Drane, Ind. Extr. v. Jefferson Std. Life Ins. Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1942
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.