Texas Case Summaries
Federal Enforcement »

Carter v. State Farm Lloyds — Court barred recovery of attorney’s fees incurred after State Farm raised inadequate presuit notice

Unreported / Non-Citable

Case
Jean Carter v. State Farm Lloyds
Court
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Amarillo Division
Judge
Not specified
Date Decided
August 10, 2026
Docket No.
2:26-cv-00144
Topics
Insurance; Presuit Notice; Attorney’s Fees

Background

Jean Carter brought a first-party insurance claim against State Farm Lloyds arising from alleged storm damage to her property. Because the action concerned property damage caused by forces of nature, it was governed by Chapter 542A of the Texas Insurance Code.

Carter’s counsel sent State Farm a letter on June 2, 2026, identifying it as a formal demand under Chapter 542A. Carter filed suit three days later, on June 5, rather than waiting the 61 days required by Section 542A.003. State Farm pleaded the notice deficiency in its June 26 answer and later moved to limit Carter’s attorney’s-fee claim. Carter did not oppose the motion.

The Court’s Holding

The court granted State Farm’s motion. It held that Carter failed to provide the required 61-day presuit notice and that the record did not indicate notice was impracticable because the limitations period was about to expire.

Under Section 542A.007(d), when an insurer timely pleads and proves that it did not receive the required notice, a court may not award the claimant attorney’s fees incurred after the insurer files that pleading. Because State Farm raised the deficiency in its June 26, 2026 answer, the court ruled that Carter could not recover any attorney’s fees incurred after that date.

Key Takeaways

  • A Chapter 542A demand sent only three days before suit does not satisfy the statute’s 61-day presuit-notice requirement.
  • The statutory exception did not apply because the record contained no indication that providing timely notice was impracticable.
  • Carter’s fee limitation began on June 26, 2026, when State Farm pleaded the notice deficiency in its answer.

Why It Matters

The ruling underscores that failure to observe Chapter 542A’s notice period can substantially reduce a policyholder’s recoverable attorney’s fees even if the underlying insurance claims remain pending. Counsel handling Texas weather-related property claims should provide compliant notice at least 61 days before filing suit unless a supported statutory exception applies.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top