Texas Regulatory Update: Reporting on News and Issues for Texas Regulated Entities

 

New Texas Reinsurance Rules for Reciprocal Insurers Take Effect

The Texas Department of Insurance (“TDI”) adopted new administrative rules for reciprocal reinsurers that took effect on January 1, 2022. According to TDI, the goal of the new reinsurance regulations is to “ensure TDI retains its authority to regulate credit for reinsurance matters associated with covered agreements, align TDI’s rules with the current approach to regulate reserve financing arrangements for certain life insurance policies, and align TDI’s rules with updates to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners’ (NAIC) accreditation requirements.”

Read More

5th. Circ. Medicare Ruling Could Halt Pro-Provider Trend

Austin Partner Kent Hofmann authored an article for Law360 examining a recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit opinion that likely forecloses the possibility of injunctive relief in that jurisdiction against recoupment for Medicare providers still faced with an overpayment demand after navigating the first two stages of the administrative appeal process.

Read More

Texas Governor Adopts Executive Order Exempting Insurance Industry Business Travel from Quarantine Restrictions

Texas Governor Gregg Abbott on March 31, 2020, issued Executive Order GA 14 renewing social distancing guidelines in Texas.  Of particular significance to the insurance industry, the Governor’s Order adopted U.S. Department of Homeland Security guidance establishing insurance services as “essential services” and classifying members of the insurance industry as federally identified “essential critical infrastructure workers” under the broader heading of “Financial Services.”  

Read More

Locke Lord QuickStudy: Texas Supreme Court Disallows Windfall in Personal Injury Protection Insurance Suit—Court looks to actual medical expense incurred, not full list rates

On March 27, 2020, the Texas Supreme Court, in Farmers Texas County Mutual Insurance Company v. Beasley, No. 18-0469, decided ‎whether “an injured plaintiff had standing to bring suit against his personal ‎injury protection (PIP) policy insurer after the insurer paid the incurred ‎medical expenses pursuant to the PIP policy, but the amount the PIP insurer ‎paid was the negotiated rate between the plaintiff’s health care insurer and the ‎medical providers—not the medical providers’ list rate.”

Read More
Loading

Topics

Archives

Email the Editors

Click here to Email the Editors

Locke Lord LLP

For the latest information about our Firm visit lockelord.com