International Security Life Insurance Co. v. Spray

461 S.W.2d 176, 1970 Tex. App. LEXIS 2167
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedNovember 23, 1970
DocketNo. 4430
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 461 S.W.2d 176 (International Security Life Insurance Co. v. Spray) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
International Security Life Insurance Co. v. Spray, 461 S.W.2d 176, 1970 Tex. App. LEXIS 2167 (Tex. Ct. App. 1970).

Opinion

WALTER, Justice.

Mr. and Mrs. Preston Spray recovered a judgment against International Security Life Insurance Company on a hospital and medical expense policy for $1,147.00, statutory penalty in the amount of $137.64 and $1,750.00 attorney’s fees.

The Company has appealed contending (1) the court erred in awarding an excessive amount of attorney’s fees, (2) in rendering a conditional judgment and (3) in imposing a penalty upon appellant for exercising its right of appeal.

The judgment provides:

“It is further ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED by the court that the plaintiff herein have and recover judgment of and from the defendant in the sum of $1750.00 as attorney’s fees, and it is the further judgment of the court that if defendant herein does not appeal this cause, the said judgment should be credited with $1,000.00 as attorney’s fees, leaving recovery for attorney’s fees herein the sum of $750.00. It is the further judgment of the court that if the defendant appeals this cause to the Court of Civil Appeals and said cause is not carried by appeal or writ of error to the Supreme Court of Texas, that its judgment be credited with the sum of $500.00 on attorney’s fees, leaving recovery for attorney’s fees herein in the sum of $1250.00.”

This was a non-jury case and the court heard evidence on the reasonableness of the attorney’s fees. The record contains some evidence of probative force supporting the judgment for attorney’s fees. The appellant has failed to discharge its burden of showing that the amount of attorney’s fees is excessive.

Appellant’s other points have been decided contrary to its contentions in Grimes v. Robitaille, Tex.Civ.App., 288 S.W.2d 211, (writ ref. n. r. e.) and in Scanlan v. Gulf Bitulithic Company, Tex.Civ.App., 27 S.W.2d 877 (reversed on other grounds).

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

Agricultural Workers Mutual Auto Insurance Co. v. Baty
517 S.W.2d 901 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1974)
Key Life Insurance Co. of South Carolina v. Davis
509 S.W.2d 403 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1974)
Bankers Commercial Life Insurance Co. v. Ramey
476 S.W.2d 715 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1972)
International Security Life Insurance Co. v. Spray
468 S.W.2d 347 (Texas Supreme Court, 1971)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
461 S.W.2d 176, 1970 Tex. App. LEXIS 2167, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/international-security-life-insurance-co-v-spray-texapp-1970.