PJC Business

PJC 101.60

C ONTRACTS

ance Ass’n of Philadelphia v. Driggers , 238 S.W. 633, 635 (Tex. 1922) (failure to sub mit to examination after loss did not bar recovery but merely suspended right until complied with); see also In re Cypress Texas Lloyds , 437 S.W.3d 1, 15 (Tex. App.— Corpus Christi–Edinburg 2011, orig. proceeding) (insurer’s remedy to enforce condi tion precedent requiring examination is abatement). Instructions based on policy language. The principles regarding tracking policy language found in PJC 101.57–101.59 should be followed. See, e.g., League City v. Texas Windstorm Insurance Ass’n , No. 01-15-00117-CV, 2017 WL 405816, at *5 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Jan. 31, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.) (approving jury question regarding prejudice). Excuse. If the court determines that the insurance case presents an instance in which failure to comply with the condition precedent may be excused, the court should charge the jury with the elements of excuse. See, e.g., Employers Casualty Co. v. Scott Electric , 513 S.W.2d 642, 645 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg 1974, no writ); Proctor v. Southland Life Insurance Co. , 522 S.W.2d 261, 265 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1975, writ ref’d n.r.e.); Dairyland County Mutual Insurance Co. v. Roman , 486 S.W.2d 847 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1972), aff’d , 498 S.W.2d 154 (Tex. 1973).

134