Texas Supreme Court Clarifies The “Independent Injury Rule”

by Strasburger & Price, LLP

When can an insured recover policy benefits as damages under the Insurance Code, potentially trebling what would otherwise be ordinary contract damages?  That question, which has divided Texas insurance lawyers for more than a decade, was tackled and largely resolved by the Texas Supreme Court in USAA Texas Lloyds Co. v. Menchaca, No. 14-0721, 2017 Tex. LEXIS 361 (April 7, 2017).

In Texas, an insurance carrier may be liable to its insured for breach of the insurance policy or for violations of statutory provisions that govern the manner in which insurers review and resolve claims for policy benefits.  Unlike contract-based claims, claims based on statutory violations – sometimes referred to as “bad faith” claims – allow the insured to recover treble damages if the insurer commits the violation knowingly.

This question of whether a policyholder can recover policy benefits as damages under the Insurance Code typically arises in two distinct scenarios.  The first, and the one at issue in Menchaca, occurs when a jury fails to find any breach of the insurance policy, but finds a violation of the Insurance Code and awards the same amount of damages that would have been owed under the policy had it covered the incident.  The second occurs when a jury finds both a breach of the policy and a breach of the Insurance Code and awards the same amount of damages for each.[1]  In that situation, the insured typically “elects” to recover the damages awarded under the Insurance Code to take advantage of treble damages.

Insurers complained that the first scenario forced them to pay policy benefits when there was no coverage, while the second allowed trebling of ordinary contract damages.

Two historical decisions from the Texas Supreme Court were at the center of complex and divergent interpretations as to whether policy benefits are available as damages for Insurance Code violations and, if so, when.

In Vail v. Texas Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co., 754 S.W.2d 136 (Tex. 1988), the Texas Supreme Court appeared to allow the recovery of policy benefits as damages for Insurance Code violations, stating that an insurer’s “unfair refusal to pay the insured’s claim causes damages as a matter of law in at least the amount of the policy benefits wrongfully withheld.”

Ten years later, however, in Provident American Ins. Co. v. Castañeda, 988 S.W.2d 189 (Tex. 1998), the Court held that extra-contractual damages were not recoverable because “none of the actions or inactions of [the insurer] was the producing cause of any damage separate and apart from those that would have resulted from a wrongful denial of the claim.” Castañeda appeared to recognize that alleged bad faith cannot constitute a producing cause of damage (i.e. “a cause … without which the damages would not have occurred”) when a breach of the policy alone has caused the same damages.

Castañeda was often cited as abrogating Vail and establishing a rule that damages were not available under the Insurance Code unless the code violations caused an “independent injury” separate and apart from the loss of policy proceeds.  For example, the Fifth Circuit concluded in In re Deepwater Horizon, 807 F.3d 689, 698 (5th Cir. 2015), that “decisions from the supreme court of Texas and Texas’s intermediate appellate courts arguably cast doubt on Vail’s continued vitality” and interpreted Castañeda “as setting out the opposite rule from that in Vail.” Id.

Faced with what it described as a line of decisions creating uncertainties in the law because of varying facts and circumstances, the Texas Supreme Court resolved to settle ongoing conflicts over the independent injury rule in Menchaca.

Menchaca is one of many coverage disputes arising after Hurricane Ike struck Galveston in 2008.  Following the hurricane, Gail Menchaca contacted her homeowner’s insurance company, USAA Texas Lloyds, and reported that the storm damaged her home.  After her claim was twice denied by USAA, Menchaca sued for breach of the insurance policy and for unfair settlement practices in violation of the Texas Insurance Code.   The case was tried to a jury.

  • Question 1 of the jury charge addressed Menchaca’s breach-of-contract claim.  It asked whether USAA failed “to comply with the terms of the insurance policy with respect to the claim for damages filed by Gail Menchaca resulting from Hurricane Ike.” The jury answered “No.”
  • Question 2 addressed Menchaca’s statutory claims.  It asked whether USAA engaged in various unfair or deceptive practices, including whether USAA refused “to pay a claim without conducting a reasonable investigation with respect to” that claim. As to that specific practice, the jury answered “Yes.”
  • Question 3 asked the jury to determine Menchaca’s damages that resulted from either USAA’s failure to comply with the policy or its statutory violations, calculated as “the difference, if any, between the amount USAA should have paid Gail Menchaca for her Hurricane Ike damages and the amount that was actually paid.” The jury answered “$11,350.”

Both parties moved for judgment on the verdict.  The trial court entered judgment in favor of Menchaca and the court of appeals affirmed.  The Texas Supreme Court accepted the case to settle conflicts over “whether the insured can recover policy benefits based on jury findings that the insurer violated the Texas Insurance Code and that the violation resulted in the insured’s loss of benefits the insurer “should have paid” under the policy, even though the jury also failed to find that the insurer failed to comply with its obligations under the policy.”

In resolving the dispute, the Court outlined five rules that shape the contours of an insured’s ability to recover policy benefits as actual damages under the Insurance Code:

  • The General Rule: First, an insured generally cannot recover policy benefits as damages for an insurer’s statutory violation if the policy does not provide the insured a right to receive those benefits.
  • The Entitled-to Benefits Rule: Second, an insured who establishes a right to receive benefits under the insurance policy can recover those benefits as actual damages under the Insurance Code “if the insurer’s statutory violation causes the loss of the benefits.”
  • The Benefits-Lost Rule: Third, even if the insured cannot establish a present contractual right to policy benefits, the insured can recover benefits as actual damages under the Insurance Code if the insurer’s statutory violation caused the insured to lose that contractual right.
  • The Independent Injury Rule: Fourth, if an insurer’s statutory violation causes an injury independent of the loss of policy benefits, the insured may recover damages for that injury even if the policy does not grant the insured a right to benefits.
  • The No-Recovery Rule: And fifth, an insured cannot recover any damages based on an insurer’s statutory violation if the insured had no right to receive benefits under the policy and sustained no injury independent of a right to benefits.

Id. at *11-12.  Applying these rules, the Court concluded that the trial court erred in disregarding the jury’s answer to Question 1 because the finding was neither unsupported nor immaterial.  Indeed, the finding would have precluded Menchaca from recovering policy benefits as damages under the Insurance Code based on the Supreme Court’s five guiding principles.  As a result, the Court reversed and remanded for a new trial.

The take away from Menchaca?  Damages recoverable under the Insurance Code must be carefully analyzed in terms of causation.   Under the first and third rules announced in Menchaca, if there is no coverage for the loss, policy benefits ordinarily will not be recoverable as damages under the Insurance Code.  The exception is when the Insurance Code violation somehow caused the policyholder to lose the benefits; that is, when there would have been coverage but for the Code violation. An example used by the Court is if the insurer misrepresented coverage.

Under the second rule, if there is coverage for the loss, policy benefits will be recoverable under the Insurance Code but, again, only if “’wrongful’ denial of a ‘valid’ claim for benefits results from or constitutes a statutory violation” as opposed to a mere breach of the policy.  Unfortunately, Menchaca does not explain clearly when a Code violation will in fact constitute a producing cause (i.e. a but-for cause) of the damages when the policy breach itself caused the same damages.  This ruling is likely to generate the most litigation and have the most potential benefit to policyholders.

The fourth rule is nothing new; a policy holder may recover for any independent injury apart from policy benefits caused by an Insurance Code violation.

And finally, if there is neither a right to receive benefits under the policy nor any independent injury, the policyholder will not be entitled to damages.

1] See, e.g., United National Insurance Co. v. AMJ Investments. LLC, 447 S.W.3d 1 (Houston [14th Dist.] 2014, pet. dism’d).


DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Strasburger & Price, LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Strasburger & Price, LLP

Strasburger & Price, LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.


JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.