Appellate Law

Supreme Court Applies Lamar Homes in Rare February 29 Decision

By D. Todd Smith

The Texas Supreme Court issued one opinion with this week’s orders.  In Grimes Construction, Inc. v. Great American Lloyds Insurance Co. (No. 06-0332) (per curiam), the Court reversed after concluding that the court of appeals’ decision conflicted with Lamar Homes, Inc. v. Mid-Continent Casualty Co., 242 S.W.3d 1 (Tex. 2007).

In Lamar Homes, the Court determined that allegations of unintended construction defects might constitute an ?accident? or ?occurrence? under a commercial general liability policy and that allegations of damage to or loss of use of the home itself might also constitute ?property damage? sufficient to trigger the duty to defend.  Grimes presented similar issues, but the court of appeals concluded that defective work involved a contract claim outside the CGL policy’s scope.  The supreme court remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.

The Grimes opinion bears the noteworthy delivery date of February 29.  I’m no historian, but based on a quick Westlaw search, the Court seems to have issued only nine other opinions on February 29.  They are:

• Jensen v. Jensen,  665 S.W.2d 107 (Tex. 1984);
• Brownlee v. Brownlee, 665 S.W.2d 111 (Tex. 1984);
• Gappelberg v. Landrum, 666 S.W.2d 88 (Tex. 1984);
• Ex parte Ratliff, 3 S.W.2d 406 (Tex. 1928);
• Monger & Henry v. Delaware Ins. Co., 79 S.W. 7 (Tex. 1904);
• Western Union Tel. Co. v. Arnold, 79 S.W. 8 (Tex. 1904);
• Houston E. & W.T. Ry. v. Hardy, 61 Tex. 230 (1884);
• Astugueville v. Loustaunau, 61 Tex. 233 (1884); and
• Perkins v. Dunlavy, 61 Tex. 241 (1884).

Standing alone, Grimes adds nothing to Texas jurisprudence, but it nonetheless joins a special class of cases based on its issuance date.

Full post as published by Texas Appellate Law Blog on February 29, 2008 (boomark / email).