State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Valdez, No. 04-22-00113-CV, — S.W.3d —, 2024 WL 349295 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Jan. 31, 2024, no pet. h.).

Successfully affirmed a judgment following a jury trial in favor of an insured against his UIM carrier for his UIM benefits and attorney’s fees. The Court of Appeals rejected State Farm’s argument that the attorneys’ fees were not “necessary” under the UDJA because of a pre-suit settlement offer, even though that offer ended up being greater than the ultimate recovery.

Thad D. Spalding, Partner