In Re X.L. Insurance Co.

Texas Supreme Court

In Re X.L. Insurance Co.

988 S.W.2d 741, 42 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 350, 1999 Tex. LEXIS 5, 1999 WL 47126

CourtTexas Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 4, 1999

Docket96-0583

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 988 S.W.2d 741 (In Re X.L. Insurance Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In Re X.L. Insurance Co., 988 S.W.2d 741, 42 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 350, 1999 Tex. LEXIS 5, 1999 WL 47126 (Tex. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We granted leave to file petition for writ of mandamus to consider whether an insurance company, which had not signed an arbitration agreement, could nevertheless be compelled to arbitrate its cross-claim against a co-insurer, which had an arbitration agreement with the common insured. The court of appeals denied mandamus relief, concluding that the insurance company was not bound by the arbitration agreement because its cross-claim for statutory contribution under the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code was an independent action. 918 S.W.2d 687.

After oral argument, we abated action on this case while the parties explored settlement possibilities. We are now advised that the insurance company has settled all underlying claims with the plaintiff insured and has further dismissed its cross-claim against the co-insurer who sought to compel arbitration. Accordingly, this original proceeding is dismissed as moot. We express no opinion regarding the correctness of the court of appeals’ opinion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

We granted leave to file petition for writ of mandamus to consider whether an insurance company, which had not signed an arbitration agreement, could nevertheless be compelled to arbitrate its cross-claim against a co-insurer, which had an arbitration agreement with the common insured. The court of appeals denied mandamus relief, concluding that the insurance company was not bound by the arbitration agreement because its cross-claim for statutory contribution under the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code was an independent action. 918 S.W.2d 687.

After oral argument, we abated action on this case while the parties explored settlement possibilities. We are now advised that the insurance company has settled all underlying claims with the plaintiff insured and has further dismissed its cross-claim against the co-insurer who sought to compel arbitration. Accordingly, this original proceeding is dismissed as moot. We express no opinion regarding the correctness of the court of appeals’ opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

988 S.W.2d 741, 42 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 350, 1999 Tex. LEXIS 5, 1999 WL 47126, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-xl-insurance-co-tex-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack