Admiral Ins. Co. v. Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Ry. Co.
| Decision Date | 27 January 1993 |
| Docket Number | No. 2-92-198-CV,2-92-198-CV |
| Citation | 848 S.W.2d 251 |
| Parties | 1994-2 Trade Cases P 70,739 ADMIRAL INSURANCE COMPANY, John David Fenn, Ancon Insurance Company (UK) Ltd., Anglo American Insurance Company Ltd., Argonaut Northwest Insurance Company, Assicurazioni Generali, S.P.A., Les Assurances Du Credit, S.A., Bermuda Fire & Marine Insurance Company Ltd., Britamco Insurance Company, British National Life Insurance Society Ltd., British Reserve Insurance Company Ltd., Brittany Insurance Company, CNA Reinsurance of London Ltd., Commercial Union Assurance of United Kingdom Ltd., Compagnie Belge D'Assurance-Credit, S.A., Compagnie Europeene D'Assurance Industrielles, S.A., The Dominion Insurance Company Ltd., Excess Insurance Company Ltd., Folksam International Insurance Company (UK) Ltd., Hawk Insurance Company, Heddington Insurance (UK) Ltd., Highlands Insurance Company, Imperio Companhia De Seguros, Indemnity Marine Assurance Company Ltd., Italia Assicurazioni, L'Etiole S.A. Beige D'Assurance, Lexington Insurance Company Ltd., London and Edinburgh General Insurance Company Ltd., Ludgate Insurance Company Ltd., Malaysia British Insurance Company, Mercator Re, N.V., Nissan Fire & Marine Insurance Company Ltd., North Atlantic Insurance Company Ltd., The People's Insurance Company of China, Pine Top Insurance Company, Royale Beige Incendie Reassurance S.A. D'Assurance, Simcoe & Erie General Insurance Co., Slater, Walker Insurance Company Ltd., Sovereign Marine & General Insurance Company Ltd., St. Katherine Insurance Company Ltd., Stronghold Insurance Company Ltd., Terra Nova Insurance Company Ltd., The Tokio Fire & Marine Insurance Company (UK) Ltd., Triggs-Hansa Insurance Company Ltd., Turegum Insurance Company, Unionamerica Insurance Company Ltd., Universal Reinsurance Corp., Walbrook Insurance Company Ltd., Winterthur Swiss Insurance Company, Wuerttembergische A.G. Versicherungs-Beteiligunsgesellschaft, Yasuda Fire & Marine Insurance Company (UK) Ltd., Zurich International (UK) Ltd., Stonewall Insurance Company, Allianz Underwrit |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Vinson & Elkins L.L.P., and John L. Murchison, Jr., David H. Brown, Karl S. Stern, Karen B. Jewell, Kenneth D. Hughes, Houston, and Michael J. Henke, Washington, DC (Ropes & Gray and George Marshall Moriarty, Kenneth W. Erickson, and Michael R. Pontrelli, of counsel), for appellants John David Fenn and London Market Companies.
Strasburger & Price, L.L.P., and W. Neil Rambin, Mark M. Donheiser, Dallas, for appellants Northbrook Excess & Surplus Ins. Co., Hudson Ins. Co.
Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons, Leo John Jordan, Dallas, for appellant Alliance Underwriters Ins. Co.
Richards, Watson & Gershon, Thomas M. Jimbo, Los Angeles, CA, for appellant First State Ins. Co.
Phillip & Orpett, P.C., and Janet R. Davis, Chicago, IL, for appellant Old Republic Ins. Co.
Thompson & Knight, and Stephen L. Tatum, Fort Worth, German, Gallagher & Murtagh, and Kathleen Carson, Philadelphia, PA, for appellant Stonewall Ins. Co.
Fanning Harper & Martinson, and Don Martinson, Sharis L. Hauder, Dallas, for appellants American Home Ins. Co., Audubon Indem. Co., Granite State Ins. Co., Insurance Co. of the State of Pa., Landmark Ins. Co., Nat. Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA, New Hampshire Ins. Co. and Lexington Ins. Co.
Law Offices of William A. Brasher, and William A. Brasher, St. Louis, MO, Fielding, Barrett & Taylor, and David Fielding, Cantey & Hanger, and Ralph H. Duggins, Estil Vance, Jr., and J.K. Leonard, Fort Worth, for appellee.
Before FARRIS, DAY and HOPKINS (Retired, Sitting by Assignment), JJ.
This is an appeal from an antisuit temporary injunction granted in favor of the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company (Santa Fe).
We affirm.
In 1984 ETSI Pipeline Project and Energy Transportation Systems, Inc. (ETSI) filed suit against Santa Fe and several other common carriers in federal district court in Beaumont, Texas (the ETSI suit). 1 With the exception of Santa Fe, the common carriers settled with ETSI before trial. Following trial, the jury returned a verdict against Santa Fe, which Santa Fe appealed to the Fifth Circuit. Santa Fe and ETSI eventually settled the case before the Fifth Circuit made its ruling on the matter.
In addition to Santa Fe, the parties to this action are Santa Fe's liability insurance carriers and can be categorized into three groups: the London appellants, the Northbrook appellants, and the AIG appellants.
The London appellants are: John David Fenn, Admiral Insurance Company, Ancon Insurance Company (UK) Ltd., Anglo American Insurance Company Ltd., Argonaut Northwest Insurance Company, Assicurazioni Generali, S.P.A., Les Assurances du Credit, S.A., Bermuda Fire & Marine Insurance Company Ltd., Britamco Insurance Company, British National Life Insurance Society Ltd., British Reserve Insurance Company Ltd., Brittany Insurance Company, CNA Reinsurance of London Ltd., Commercial Union Assurance of United Kingdom Ltd., Compagnie Belge D'Assurance-Credit, S.A., Compagnie Europeene D'Assurance Industrielles, S.A., The Dominion Insurance Company Ltd., Excess Insurance Company Ltd., Folksam International Insurance Company (UK) Ltd., Hawk Insurance Company, Heddington Insurance (UK) Ltd., Highlands Insurance Company, Imperio Companhia de Seguros, Indemnity Marine Assurance Company Ltd., Italia Assicurazioni, L'Etiole S.A. Beige D'Assurance, Lexington Insurance Company Ltd., London and Edinburgh General Insurance Company Ltd., Ludgate Insurance Company Ltd., Malaysia British Insurance Company, Mercator Re, N.V., Nissan Fire & Marine Insurance Company Ltd., North Atlantic Insurance Company Ltd., The People's Insurance Company of China, Pine Top Insurance Company, Royale Beige Incendie Reassurance S.A. D'Assurance, Simcoe & Erie General Insurance Co., Slater, Walker Insurance Company Ltd., Sovereign Marine & General Insurance Company Ltd., St. Katherine Insurance Company Ltd., Stronghold Insurance Company Ltd., Terra Nova Insurance Company Ltd., The Tokio Fire & Marine Insurance Company (UK) Ltd., Triggs-Hansa Insurance Company Ltd., Turegum Insurance Company, Unionamerica Insurance Company Ltd., Universal Reinsurance Corp., Walbrook Insurance Company Ltd., Winterthur Swiss Insurance Company, Wuerttembergische A.G. Versicherungs-Beteiligunsgesellschaft, Yasuda Fire & Marine Insurance Company (UK) Ltd., Zurich International (UK) Ltd.
The Northbrook appellants consist of Allstate Insurance Company (formerly Northbrook Excess & Surplus Insurance Company), Hudson Insurance Company, Allianz Underwriters Insurance Company, Old Republic Insurance Company, First State Insurance Company, Columbia Casualty Company, California Union Insurance Company, Insurance Company of North America, and Stonewall Insurance Company.
Finally, the AIG group of appellants includes American Home Insurance Company, Audubon Indemnity Company, Granite State Insurance Company, Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania, Landmark Insurance Company, National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa., New Hampshire Insurance Company, and Lexington Insurance Company.
Absent a designation of one of these groups, all references to "appellants" in this opinion refer to the appellants collectively.
On May 27, 1992, Santa Fe filed the instant suit seeking a declaration that appellants are obligated under the insurance policies to indemnify Santa Fe for the amount paid in settlement and attorney's fees in the ETSI suit. Santa Fe also sought breach of contract damages.
On June 16, 1992, the Northbrook appellants filed suit in Illinois state court seeking a declaration that they have no duty to indemnify Santa Fe for any losses stemming from the ETSI suit. After the Illinois suit was filed, Santa Fe sought and received a temporary restraining order from the Texas trial court. After a two-day hearing, the trial court entered an injunction enjoining all the appellants from taking further action in the Illinois suit, except as required to do so by an order of the Illinois court, and from commencing or prosecuting any action in any other federal or state court against Santa Fe pertaining to Santa Fe's claimed losses in the ETSI suit.
Appellants take issue with the trial court's ruling on the following grounds: In their three-part point of error, the London appellants complain the injunction is improper because: (1) the pendency of a single parallel case does not warrant an antisuit injunction; (2) the service of suit clause in the insurance policies is not a basis for enjoining the Illinois action; and (3) the Illinois action does not threaten the Texas trial court's jurisdiction. The Northbrook appellants reiterate these complaints and raise two additional grounds for error: (4) Santa Fe has failed to establish its likelihood of success on the merits of the underlying action; and (5) Santa Fe has failed to establish it has no adequate remedy at law. 2 In their reply briefs, the London and Northbrook appellants also claim that the Illinois suit poses no threat to Texas public policy. The AIG appellants adopt the points of error, reply points and arguments raised by the London and Northbrook appellants.
The overriding question presented...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
London Market Insurers v. Am. Home Assur.
... ... Int'l Specialty Lines Ins. Co. v. Triton Energy Ltd., 52 S.W.3d 337, 339 (Tex ... proceedings, and we disapprove the language of Admiral Ins. [ Co. v. Atchison, Topeka & Sante Fe Ry, 848 S.W.2d ... ...
-
Monsanto Co. v. Davis
... ... Bradleys' Elec., Inc. v. Cigna Lloyds Ins. Co., 995 S.W.2d 675, 677 (Tex. 1999); see also Tex. R ... 1996), and Admiral Ins. Co. v. Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Ry. Co., 848 ... ...
-
Shamoun & Norman, LLP v. Yarto Int'l Grp., LP
... ... Golden Rule Ins. Co. v. Harper, 925 S.W.2d 649, 651 (Tex.1996) (citing ... v. Santa Fe Minerals, Inc., 851 S.W.2d 336, 339 (Tex.App.-Dallas ... harm, and that no adequate remedy at law exists); Admiral Ins. Co. v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. Co., 848 ... ...
-
Shamoun & Norman, LLP v. Yarto Int'l Grp., LP
... ... "only in very special circumstances." Golden Rule Ins. Co. v. Harper, 925 S.W.2d 649, 651 (Tex. 1996) (citing ... v. Santa Fe Materials, Inc., 851 S.W.2d 336, 339 (Tex. App.Dallas ... harm, and that no adequate remedy at law exists); Admiral Ins. Co. v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. Co., 848 ... ...