Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-10-50267/USCOURTS-ca5-10-50267-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 

---

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-50267

EVANSTON INSURANCE COMPANY

Plaintiff-Appellant/Cross-Appellee

v.

LEGACY OF LIFE, INC.

Defendant-Appellee/Cross-Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 5:09-CV-373

Before ELROD and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.*

PER CURIAM:**

We explained this case’s factual background and the issues involved in a

prior opinion. Evanston Ins. Co. v. Legacy of Life, Inc., 645 F.3d 739 (5th Cir.

2011) (Evanston I). In that opinion, we explained that this “Texas law diversity

case involves important and determinative questions of Texas law as to which

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

August 24, 2012

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Judge Garwood was a member of the panel at the time of oral arguments. His death *

on July 14, 2011, causes us to decide this case by a quorum. 28 U.S.C. § 46(d).

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: 10-50267 Document: 00511968460 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/24/2012
No. 10-50267

there is no controlling Texas Supreme Court precedent,” id. at 741, therefore we

certified the following questions to the Supreme Court of Texas pursuant to

Texas Constitution Art. 5, § 3-C and Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 58.1: 

1. Does the insurance policy provision for coverage of “personal

injury,” defined therein as “bodily injury, sickness, or disease

including death resulting therefrom sustained by any person,”

include coverage for mental anguish, unrelated to physical damage

to or disease of the plaintiff’s body?

2. Does the insurance policy provision for coverage of “property

damage,” defined therein as “physical injury to or destruction of

tangible property, including consequential loss of use thereof, or loss

of use of tangible property which has not been physically injured or

destroyed,” include coverage for the underlying plaintiff’s loss of use

of her deceased mother’s tissues, organs, bones, and body parts?

Id. at 751. The Supreme Court of Texas answered both questions in the

negative. Evanston Ins. Co. v. Legacy of Life, Inc., 2012 WL 2476935, at *1 (Tex.

2012). Because the insurance policy does not include coverage for the claims

alleged against Legacy of Life, Inc. in the underlying lawsuit, the district court

erred in concluding that Evanston Insurance Company had a duty to defend

Legacy in that lawsuit. The conclusion that Evanston has no duty to defend

Legacy in the underlying lawsuit resolves all remaining issues before this court. 

See Evanston I, 645 F.3d at 751. 

Accordingly, we REVERSE the district court’s grant of declaratory and

partial summary judgment in favor of Legacy and RENDER judgment in favor

of Evanston and against Legacy on their respective declaratory judgment claims. 

We AFFIRM the district court’s dismissal of Legacy’s remaining counterclaims

asserted in its amended answer and the district court’s order denying Legacy’s

request for attorneys’ fees in the present lawsuit. We VACATE the district

court’s order requiring Evanston to pay the costs of this suit.

2

 Case: 10-50267 Document: 00511968460 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/24/2012