Guillen Ex Rel. Guillen v. Potomac Ins. Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that unsigned letter purportedly sent to the insured regarding addition of lead exclusion to policy was insufficient to meet statutory proof-of-mailing requirements under section 143.17a of the Insurance Code
• concluding Potomac failed to prove it gave requisite notice of the policy modification containing the lead exclusion it relied on to deny its duty to defend
• dealing with the recurring appearance of the phrase “proof of mailing”
• dealing with the recurring appearance of the phrase \proof of mailing\
• dealing with the recurring appearance of the phrase \proof of mailing\
• “when a notification requirement is not satisfied with respect to a material modification to an insurance policy, the modification does not take effect.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).