insured against claim in Texas

2014Co., 455 S.W.2d at 721 ).

2003Effect of a Separation of Insureds Clause on Exclusions This is apparently a case of first impression under Texas law regarding the application of a separation of insureds clause to a policy provision that refers to “ any insured.” However, Texas courts have construed the applicability of a separation of insureds clause to a policy provision that refers to “ the insured.” In Commercial Standard Insurance Co. v. American General Insurance Co ., 455 S.W.2d 714 (Tex. 1970), the Texas Supreme Court considered the effect of a similar “severability of interests” clause on an employee exclusion for “

2025Ins., No. 02-17- 00276-CV, 2018 WL 5993445 , at *45 n.25 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Nov. 15, 2018, no pet.) (mem. op.) (Birdwell, J., dissenting on denial of en banc reconsideration) (“A ‘wasting policy’ is one that deducts from policy limits the litigation fees and expenses incurred, ordinarily by the insurer in defending the insured against a claim.” citing Westchester Fire Ins. v. Admiral Ins., 152 S.W.3d 172 , 192 & n.10 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2004, pet. denied) (en banc op. on reh’g)).

2014“If the exclusion clause uses the term ‘the insured,’ application of the separation of insureds clause requires that the term be interpreted as referring only to the insured against whom a claim is being made under the policy.” Id. (citing Commercial Standard Ins.

1960The Court of Civil Appeals in its judgment of reversal and rendition for Standard held that Standard, as an “omnibus insured” was entitled to be protected by the automobile liability insurance policy of Transport issued to Transport Company of Texas, and that the exclusion clauses (f) and (g) applied only to an employee of the insured against whom the claim was made, and hence did not exclude Standard from coverage of a claim against it by an employee of the named insured. 324 S.W. 2d 331 .

1960The Court of Civil Appeals in its judgment of reversal and rendition for Standard held that Standard, as an "omnibus insured" was entitled to be protected by the automobile liability insurance policy of Transport issued to Transport Company of Texas, and that the exclusion clauses (f) and (g) applied only to an employee of the insured against whom the claim was made, and hence did not exclude Standard from coverage of a claim against it by an employee of the named insured. 324 S.W.2d 331 .