Overview

Our firm was retained by a large church in East Texas to assist with a claim arising out of an April 2020 hail storm. Prior to our involvement, the insurance company spent close to three years conducting meetings but offering limited piecemeal payments. During that time, the insurer denied coverage for damage to the church’s metal roofs, undervalued the damage to the rest of the buildings, and delayed payment on the amounts it did pay. At one point, the insurance company even suggested that its limited payments were actually overpayments and that the church might be subject to a claim for reimbursement from the insurance company.

Recovered $35 million+
9200% improvement

Results

Once we got involved, we prepared the case for trial but offered the insurance company multiple opportunities to resolve the matter amicably and without the need for costly and time-consuming litigation. The insurer declined these opportunities repeatedly.

From the outset, the insurance company denied full payment and fought hard to limit its liability. Our strategy focused on the insurer’s failure to act in good faith during the process. Specifically, we built a case showing the insurance company’s bad faith attempt to ignore evidence of covered damage during the adjustment of the claim. During extensive discovery and evaluation of the insurer’s internal practices and delay tactics, we uncovered evidence of the insurance company’s and insurance adjusters’ financial incentives to underpay insurance claims. Cross-examinations and forensic, internal document reviews revealed flawed decision-making, bad-faith handling, and manipulation of the repair process to benefit the insurer. We even demonstrated that the insurer used threats and intimidation tactics to coerce the church into accepting a reduced payment.

Given this insurance company’s recalcitrance, in January 2025, we took the case to trial in federal court. After a four-day trial, the jury returned a $4.8 million award for breach of contract, along with $35 million in punitive damages. In total, the verdict represented a 1900% increase over our client’s final offer and a 9200% increase over the insurer’s final offer.

Our lawyers have the experience and judgment to evaluate and resolve cases amicably, and the skill to deliver full value at trial when an insurer simply won’t be reasonable.