RLI Insurance Company v. Marie Costello , 697 F. App'x 341 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 17-20126      Document: 00514144883         Page: 1    Date Filed: 09/06/2017
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    United States Court of Appeals
    No. 17-20126
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    Summary Calendar                      September 6, 2017
    Lyle W. Cayce
    RLI INSURANCE COMPANY,                                                          Clerk
    Plaintiff - Appellee
    v.
    MARIE COSTELLO,
    Defendant - Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Texas
    USDC No. 4:16-CV-940
    Before JONES, WIENER, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    After her recreational vehicle was vandalized, appellant Marie Costello
    submitted a damage claim under an insurance policy issued by appellee RLI
    Insurance Co.       The recreational vehicle was not registered when it was
    vandalized, and RLI denied Costello’s claim based on a provision that excludes
    coverage for losses to the recreational vehicle if it “does not have a valid motor
    vehicle registration at the time of the loss.” RLI also filed this declaratory-
    * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH
    CIR. R. 47.5.4.
    Case: 17-20126    Document: 00514144883     Page: 2   Date Filed: 09/06/2017
    No. 17-20126
    judgment action, seeking a judicial determination that there was no coverage
    under the policy.
    The district court agreed and granted summary judgment to RLI. In
    particular, the district court rejected Costello’s argument that Texas Insurance
    Code section 862.054—Texas’s anti-technicality statute—precludes RLI from
    relying on the vehicle-registration exclusion as a defense to coverage.
    Emphasizing the Texas Supreme Court’s recent discussion of that statute in
    Greene v. Farmers Insurance Exchange, 
    446 S.W.3d 761
    (Tex. 2014), the
    district court noted that the statute applies only to “breaches.” Thus, the
    district court reasoned, because no breach occurred in this case, the statute is
    inapplicable. The district court also considered other Texas Supreme Court
    cases that Costello claims differentiate this case from Greene, and the court
    distinguished those cases in much the same way that the Texas Supreme Court
    itself distinguished them in Greene.
    Having reviewed the briefs and the record, we AFFIRM for essentially
    the reasons given by the district court.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 17-20126

Citation Numbers: 697 F. App'x 341

Filed Date: 9/6/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023